A generalized model for prioritized multicriteria decision making systems
Introduction
In recent years, some methods have been presented for handling multicriteria decision making problems (Bellman and Zadeh, 1970, Beynon et al., 2001, Bordogna and Pasi, 1995, Chen, 1988, Chen and Chen, 2005, Fu, 2008, Filev and Yager, 1995, Filev and Yager, 1999a, Filev and Yager, 1999b, Fullér and Majlender, 2003, Kulak, 2005, Kwon et al., 2007, Kwon and Kim, 2004, Lin et al., 2007, Liu, 2006, Tacker and Silvia, 1991, Torra, 1997, Wang and Chen, 2007, Yager, 1988, Yager, 1991, Yager, 1992, Yager, 1996, Yager, 1998, Yager, 2004a, Yager, 2004b). Some methods have been presented for handling prioritized multicriteria decision making problems (Chen and Chen, 2005, Wang and Chen, 2007, Yager, 1991, Yager, 1992, Yager, 1998, Yager, 2004b). Yager (1991) presented a prioritized intersection operator, called the non-monotonic intersection operator, for default and other common-sense reasoning systems. Yager (1992) used the non-monotonic intersection operator to deal with multicriteria decision making problems and presented a type of criterion, called the second order criterion. A statement shown in (Yager, 1992), such as “I want a good job, near my house if possible”, involves the first criterion (i.e., a good job) and the second criterion (i.e., near my house if possible). A second order criterion acts as an additional selector on these alternatives which satisfy the first order criteria. If none of the elements which satisfy the first order criteria also satisfy the second order criteria, then we do not need to consider the requirements of the second order criteria. Bordogna and Pasi (1995) regarded the process of information retrieval as a multicriteria decision making activity. They used the prioritized intersection operator to deal with fuzzy information retrieval problems. Yager (1998) used the weighted conjunction of fuzzy sets and fuzzy modeling to develop the operators in fuzzy information fusion structures. Chen and Chen (2005) extended the non-monotonic intersection operator (Yager, 1991) to present a prioritized information fusion method for handling prioritized multicriteria fuzzy decision making problems based on the similarity measure of generalized fuzzy numbers. Yager (2004a) presented some methods for handling prioritized multicriteria decision making problems, based on the Bellman–Zadeh paradigm for multicriteria decision making and the ordered weighted averaging operator (OWA). In prioritized multicriteria decision making problems, some criteria may be necessary to be satisfied. An example shown in Yager (2004a) is the case of air travel, where the passengers’ safety is necessary to be satisfied. In this case, the passengers’ safety has a higher priority than saving gasoline. Tradeoffs between saving gasoline and jeopardizing the passengers’ safety are unacceptable. Yager (2004a) found that the weights associated with the lower priority criteria are related to the degree of satisfaction of the alternatives with respect to the higher priority criteria.
In this paper, we present a generalized model for prioritized multicriteria decision making systems. First, we present a new method for prioritized multicriteria decision making, where the weights of the lower priority criteria of each alternative depend on whether each alternative satisfies the requirements of all the higher priority criteria or not. If the requirements of all the higher priority criteria can not be satisfied by the alternative, then the weights of the lower priority criteria are all zero. That is, the degrees of satisfaction with respect to the lower priority criteria do not affect the overall degree of satisfaction. Then, we present a generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method for handling multicriteria decision making problems in which some criteria may have equal priority and the criteria with equal priority are aggregated by using the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator or the weighted averaging method. The proposed methods can overcome the drawbacks of the methods presented in (Yager, 2004a). They can handle multicriteria decision making problems in a more intelligent and more flexible manner.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we briefly review some multicriteria decision making methods (Bellman and Zadeh, 1970, Yager, 1988, Yager, 1996, Yager, 2004a, Yager, 2004b) and point out the drawbacks of the methods presented in (Yager, 2004a). In Section 3, we present a new method for handling prioritized multicriteria decision making problems. We also show that the proposed method can overcome the drawbacks of the methods presented in Yager (2004a). In Section 4, we present a generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method. We also show that it can overcome the drawbacks of the methods presented in Yager (2004a). In Section 5, an example is used to illustrate how the proposed generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method can handle multicriteria decision making problems with respect to different decision maker’s requests. We also make a comparison of the experimental results of the proposed generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method with Yager’s methods (2004a). The conclusions are discussed in Section 6.
Section snippets
Preliminary
A multicriteria decision making problem consists of a set A of alternatives, A = {A1, A2, …, Am}, and a set C of criteria, C = {C1, C2, …, Cn}, to evaluate each alternative and select the best one among them. Bellman and Zadeh (1970) suggested that each criterion Ci can be represented as a fuzzy subset Ci over the set of alternatives A, where Ci(Aj) denotes the degree of satisfaction of an alternative Aj with respect to the criterion Ci and Ci (Aj) ∈ [0,1]. In (Bellman & Zadeh, 1970), an aggregation
A new method for prioritized multicriteria decision making
In this section, we present a new method for handling prioritized multicriteria decision making problems. Assume that we have a decision making problem with m alternatives A1, A2, …, Am and n criteria C1, C2, …, Cn, where the priority of Cm is higher than the priority of Ck and 1 ⩽ m < k ⩽ n. The total degree of satisfaction S(Ai) of each alternative Ai can be obtained as follows:where Dij denotes the degree to which alternative Ai satisfies criterion Cj, shown as follows:
A generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method
In this section, we present a generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method. Assume that there is a prioritized multicriteria decision making problem with m alternatives A1, A2, …, Am and n sets of criteria C1, C2, …, Cn, where the priority of each criterion in Ci is higher than the priority of each criterion in Cj and 1 ⩽ i < j ⩽ n. Each set Ci of criteria has ri criteria Ci1, Ci2, …, and all of the criteria in the same set have equal priority. The total degree of satisfaction G(A
An example
In this section, we use an example to illustrate how the proposed generalized prioritized decision making method deals with a decision making problem with different decision requirements. We also make a comparison of the experimental results of the proposed generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method with Yager’s methods (2004a). Assume that John wants to buy a new car by considering the criteria “Safety”, “Price”, “Appearance” and “Performance”. In this example, assume that
Conclusions
In this paper, we have presented a generalized model for prioritized multicriteria decision making systems. We have presented a new method for prioritized multicriteria decision making problems, where the weights of the lower priority criteria of each alternative depend on whether each alternative satisfies the requirements of all the higher priority criteria or not. Moreover, we have presented a generalized prioritized multicriteria decision making method for handling multicriteria decision
Acknowledgement
This work was supported in part by the National Science Council, Republic of China, under Grant NSC 95-2221-E-011-116-MY2.
References (26)
- et al.
An expert system for multi-criteria decision making using Dempster Shafer theory
Expert Systems with Applications
(2001) - et al.
Analytic properties of maximum entropy OWA operators
Information Sciences
(1995) A fuzzy optimization method for multicriteria decision making: An application to reservoir flood control operation
Expert Systems with Applications
(2008)- et al.
On obtaining minimal variability OWA operator weights
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(2003) A decision support system for fuzzy multi-attribute selection of material handling equipments
Expert Systems with Applications
(2005)- et al.
MyMessage: Case-based reasoning and multicriteria decision making techniques for intelligent context-aware message filtering
Expert Systems with Applications
(2004) - et al.
MM-DSS: Integrating multimedia and decision-making knowledge in decision support systems
Expert Systems with Applications
(2007) - et al.
A fuzzy-based decision-making procedure for data warehouse system selection
Expert Systems with Applications
(2007) - et al.
Decision making in complex environments under conditions of high cognitive loading: A personal expert systems approach
Expert Systems with Applications
(1991) Non-monotonic set theoretic operations
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(1991)
Second order structures in multi-criteria decision making
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies
Structures for prioritized fusion of fuzzy information
Information Sciences
A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages
Computers and Mathematics with Applications
Cited by (36)
A Choquet integral based fuzzy logic approach to solve uncertain multi-criteria decision making problem
2020, Expert Systems with ApplicationsLinguistic multi-attribute decision making with multiple priorities
2017, Computers and Industrial EngineeringPrioritized multi-criteria decision making based on preference relations
2013, Computers and Industrial EngineeringCitation Excerpt :The best car is also x2. If the method of Wang and Chen (2007) and Chen and Wang (2009) is adopted, where fj (j = 1, 2, 3, 4) is accordant with (9) (τj = 0), and the satisfaction degrees in Table 3 are derived by (11) (Case 1 is selected and threshold k are 0.95, 0.65, 0.70, 0.70 respectively), then the overall evaluation values will be c(x1) = 0.363, c(x2) = 0.825, c(x3) = 0.235. If the method of Yan et al. (2011) is adopted, where the product operator is selected as the t-norm and ρj are 0.95, 0.65, 0.70, 0.70 respectively in (14), then the overall evaluation values will be c(x1) = 1.450, c(x2) = 3.300, c(x3) = 0.940.
Prioritized multi-criteria decision making based on the idea of PROMETHEE
2013, Procedia Computer ScienceMulticriteria fuzzy decision making based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets
2012, Expert Systems with ApplicationsCitation Excerpt :Chen and Niou (2011b) presented a method for fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on fuzzy induced OWA operators. Chen and Wang (2009) presented a generalized model for prioritized multicriteria decision making. In recent years, some researchers used interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets (Atanassov & Gargov, 1989) for fuzzy decision making (Chen & Lee, 2011c; Chen, Yang, & Liau, 2011; Gong & Ma, 2009; Lee, 2009a, 2009b; Li, 2010a, 2010b; Liu & Xie, 2009; Luo, Ye, & Ma, 2009; Nayagam, Muralikrishnan, & Sivaraman, 2011; Park, Park, Kwun, & Park, 2008, 2010; Tan & Chen, 2010; Tan & Zhang, 2006; Wang & Wang, 2008; Wang, Wang, & Li, 2008; Wang & Xu, 2010; Wei & Yi, 2008; Wei & Wang, 2007; Wu & Chen, 2007; Xiao & Wei, 2008; Yang & Pang, 2010; Ye, 2009), where interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets (Atanassov & Gargov, 1989) are a generalization of intuitionistic fuzzy sets (Atanassov, 1986); intuitionistic fuzzy sets (Atanassov, 1986) and interval type-2 fuzzy sets (Mendel et al., 2006) are a generalization of fuzzy sets (Zadeh, 1965).