Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Group Decision and Negotiation 6/2019

13.09.2019

Probabilistic Option Prioritizing in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution

verfasst von: Leandro Chaves Rêgo, Giannini Italino Alves Vieira

Erschienen in: Group Decision and Negotiation | Ausgabe 6/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Probabilistic preferences have been proposed in the graph model for conflict resolution (GMCR) to accommodate both situations in which a decision maker (DM) vacillates in which criteria to use when comparing two scenarios and also situations in which there is uncertainty regarding who will act as a DM representative. In this paper, we propose two option prioritizing techniques to obtain probabilistic preferences in the GMCR more efficiently. The crisp preference option prioritizing relies on an ordered sequence of preference statements that determines the crisp preference relation. In the first proposed technique, a probability distribution is associated with a class of ordered sequences of preference statements of the DM, where the probability of state s being preferred to state t by the DM consists of the sum of the probabilities of the ordered sequences of preference statements where s is preferred to t according to the crisp preference based on the corresponding ordered sequence of preference statements. In the second technique proposed, we allow for uncertainty both on the set of preference statements considered by a DM and also on which preference statement within the set is the most important one for him. An application is provided to illustrate the use of these techniques.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
The assumption that the sets of DMs’ options are disjoint for different DMs can always be made without loss of generality by assuming that options are labeled by the DM who takes it.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (1993) Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution, vol 11. Wiley, New York Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (1993) Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution, vol 11. Wiley, New York
Zurück zum Zitat Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: games, metagames, and political behavior. MIT press, Cambridge Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: games, metagames, and political behavior. MIT press, Cambridge
Zurück zum Zitat Kreps D (1988) Notes on the theory of choice. Westview, Boulder Kreps D (1988) Notes on the theory of choice. Westview, Boulder
Zurück zum Zitat Nash JF (1950) Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proc Nat Acad Sci 36(1):48–49CrossRef Nash JF (1950) Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proc Nat Acad Sci 36(1):48–49CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat O’Hagan A, Buck CE, Daneshkhah A, Eiser JR, Garthwaite PH, Jenkinson DJ, Oakley JE, Rakow T (2006) Uncertain judgements: eliciting experts’ probabilities. Wiley, New YorkCrossRef O’Hagan A, Buck CE, Daneshkhah A, Eiser JR, Garthwaite PH, Jenkinson DJ, Oakley JE, Rakow T (2006) Uncertain judgements: eliciting experts’ probabilities. Wiley, New YorkCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Peng X, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L (1997) Representing ordinal preferences in the decision support system GMCR II. In: 1997 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics. Computational cybernetics and simulation, vol 1. IEEE, pp 809–814. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.1997.626196 Peng X, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L (1997) Representing ordinal preferences in the decision support system GMCR II. In: 1997 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics. Computational cybernetics and simulation, vol 1. IEEE, pp 809–814. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​ICSMC.​1997.​626196
Zurück zum Zitat Wilcox NT (2008) Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison. In: Risk aversion in experiments. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 197–292 Wilcox NT (2008) Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison. In: Risk aversion in experiments. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp 197–292
Zurück zum Zitat Yu J, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L (2017) Fuzzy strength of preference in the graph model for conflict resolution with two decision makers. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, pp 3574–3577, https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2017.8123186 Yu J, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L (2017) Fuzzy strength of preference in the graph model for conflict resolution with two decision makers. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE, pp 3574–3577, https://​doi.​org/​10.​1109/​SMC.​2017.​8123186
Zurück zum Zitat Zhao S, Xu H (2017) Grey option prioritization for the graph model for conflict resolution. J Grey Syst 29(3):14–26 Zhao S, Xu H (2017) Grey option prioritization for the graph model for conflict resolution. J Grey Syst 29(3):14–26
Metadaten
Titel
Probabilistic Option Prioritizing in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution
verfasst von
Leandro Chaves Rêgo
Giannini Italino Alves Vieira
Publikationsdatum
13.09.2019
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Group Decision and Negotiation / Ausgabe 6/2019
Print ISSN: 0926-2644
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9907
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-019-09635-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2019

Group Decision and Negotiation 6/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner