• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基于加法一致性的具有不完全模糊偏好关系的群体决策模型

Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency.

作者信息

Herrera-Viedma Enrique, Chiclana Francisco, Herrera Francisco, Alonso Sergio

机构信息

Department of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Granada, Spain.

出版信息

IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 2007 Feb;37(1):176-89. doi: 10.1109/tsmcb.2006.875872.

DOI:10.1109/tsmcb.2006.875872
PMID:17278570
Abstract

In decision-making problems there may be cases in which experts do not have an in-depth knowledge of the problem to be solved. In such cases, experts may not put their opinion forward about certain aspects of the problem, and as a result they may present incomplete preferences, i.e., some preference values may not be given or may be missing. In this paper, we present a new model for group decision making in which experts' preferences can be expressed as incomplete fuzzy preference relations. As part of this decision model, we propose an iterative procedure to estimate the missing information in an expert's incomplete fuzzy preference relation. This procedure is guided by the additive-consistency (AC) property and only uses the preference values the expert provides. The AC property is also used to measure the level of consistency of the information provided by the experts and also to propose a new induced ordered weighted averaging (IOWA) operator, the AC-IOWA operator, which permits the aggregation of the experts' preferences in such a way that more importance is given to the most consistent ones. Finally, the selection of the solution set of alternatives according to the fuzzy majority of the experts is based on two quantifier-guided choice degrees: the dominance and the nondominance degree.

摘要

在决策问题中,可能存在专家对要解决的问题没有深入了解的情况。在这种情况下,专家可能不会就问题的某些方面提出自己的意见,结果他们可能会给出不完整的偏好,即某些偏好值可能未给出或缺失。在本文中,我们提出了一种新的群体决策模型,其中专家的偏好可以表示为不完整的模糊偏好关系。作为该决策模型的一部分,我们提出了一种迭代程序来估计专家不完整模糊偏好关系中的缺失信息。该程序以加法一致性(AC)属性为指导,并且仅使用专家提供的偏好值。AC属性还用于衡量专家提供的信息的一致性水平,并提出一种新的诱导有序加权平均(IOWA)算子,即AC - IOWA算子,它允许以更重视最一致偏好的方式汇总专家的偏好。最后,根据专家的模糊多数来选择备选方案的解集基于两个量词引导的选择度:优势度和非优势度。

相似文献

1
Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency.基于加法一致性的具有不完全模糊偏好关系的群体决策模型
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 2007 Feb;37(1):176-89. doi: 10.1109/tsmcb.2006.875872.
2
TOPSIS-based consensus model for group decision-making with incomplete interval fuzzy preference relations.基于 TOPSIS 的群组决策共识模型,用于处理不完全区间模糊偏好关系。
IEEE Trans Cybern. 2014 Aug;44(8):1283-94. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2013.2282037. Epub 2013 Sep 26.
3
Nature Disaster Risk Evaluation with a Group Decision Making Method Based on Incomplete Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relations.基于不完全犹豫模糊语言偏好关系的群决策方法的自然灾害风险评估。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Apr 13;15(4):751. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15040751.
4
A satisfactory-oriented approach to multiexpert decision-making with linguistic assessments.
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 2005 Apr;35(2):184-96. doi: 10.1109/tsmcb.2004.842248.
5
MAGDM linear-programming models with distinct uncertain preference structures.具有不同不确定偏好结构的MAGDM线性规划模型。
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 2008 Oct;38(5):1356-70. doi: 10.1109/TSMCB.2008.925752.
6
Deriving a ranking from hesitant fuzzy preference relations under group decision making.群组决策下犹豫模糊偏好关系的排序方法。
IEEE Trans Cybern. 2014 Aug;44(8):1328-37. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2013.2283021. Epub 2013 Oct 23.
7
Interval-valued distributed preference relation and its application to group decision making.区间值分布偏好关系及其在群体决策中的应用。
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 11;13(6):e0198393. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198393. eCollection 2018.
8
Contingency response decision of network public opinion emergencies based on intuitionistic fuzzy entropy and preference information of decision makers.基于直觉模糊熵和决策者偏好信息的网络舆情突发事件应急响应决策。
Sci Rep. 2022 Feb 28;12(1):3246. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-07183-7.
9
Multiple-attribute group decision making with different formats of preference information on attributes.具有不同属性偏好信息形式的多属性群决策
IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 2007 Dec;37(6):1500-11. doi: 10.1109/tsmcb.2007.904832.
10
On Consistency Test Method of Expert Opinion in Ecological Security Assessment.生态安全评估中专家意见一致性检验方法研究
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 4;14(9):1012. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14091012.

引用本文的文献

1
Application of Fuzzy Logic-Based Expert Advisory Systems in Optimizing the Decision-Making Process for Material Selection in Additive Manufacturing.基于模糊逻辑的专家咨询系统在增材制造材料选择决策过程优化中的应用。
Materials (Basel). 2025 Jan 13;18(2):324. doi: 10.3390/ma18020324.
2
Development of hamming and hausdorff distance metrics for cubic intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft set in cement storage quality control: Development and evaluation.用于水泥存储质量控制的三次直觉模糊超软集的汉明和豪斯多夫距离度量的开发:开发与评估。
PLoS One. 2023 Sep 25;18(9):e0291817. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291817. eCollection 2023.
3
A Consensus-Reaching Approach to the Evaluation of Product Design Alternatives with Multiple Preference Structures.
具有多种偏好结构的产品设计方案评价的共识达成方法。
Comput Intell Neurosci. 2021 Nov 10;2021:6992648. doi: 10.1155/2021/6992648. eCollection 2021.
4
Public Opinion Polarization by Individual Revenue from the Social Preference Theory.社会偏好理论视角下个人收入对舆论极化的影响。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 4;17(3):946. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17030946.
5
An Optimization-Based Approach to Social Network Group Decision Making with an Application to Earthquake Shelter-Site Selection.基于优化的社会网络群体决策方法及其在地震避难所选址中的应用。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jul 31;16(15):2740. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16152740.
6
A group decision making tool for assessing climate policy risks against multiple criteria.一种用于根据多个标准评估气候政策风险的群体决策工具。
Heliyon. 2018 Mar 29;4(3):e00588. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00588. eCollection 2018 Mar.
7
On Consistency Test Method of Expert Opinion in Ecological Security Assessment.生态安全评估中专家意见一致性检验方法研究
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017 Sep 4;14(9):1012. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14091012.