Abstract
Decisions can be assessed by sets of positive and negative arguments — the problem is then to compare these sets. Studies in psychology have shown that the scale of evaluation of decisions should then be considered as bipolar. The second characteristic of the problem we are interested in is the qualitative nature of the decision process — decisions are often made on the basis of an ordinal ranking of the arguments rather than on a genuine numerical evaluation of their degrees of attractiveness or rejection. In this paper, we present and axiomatically characterize two methods based on possibilistic order of magnitude reasoning that are capable of handling positive and negative affects. They are extensions of the maximin and maximax criteria to the bipolar case. More decisive rules are also proposed, capturing both the Pareto principle and the idea of order of magnitude reasoning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amgoud, L., Bonnefon, J.F., Prade, H.: An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 269–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making decisions: A possibilistic logic approach. In: Proceedings of UAI, pp. 10–17 (2004)
Behringer, F.A.: On optimal decisions under complete ignorance: a new criterion stronger than both Pareto and maxmin. Europ. J. Op. Res 1, 295–306 (1977)
Benferhat, S., Kaci, S.: Representing and reasoning with prioritized preferences. In: Working Notes, Bipolarity Workshop, Le Fossat, France (2005)
Bilbao, J.M., Fernandez, J.R., Jiménez Losada, A., Lebrón, E.: Bicooperative games. In: Bilbao, J.M. (ed.) Cooperative games on combinatorial structures, pp. 23–26. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)
Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C.: Gradual handling of contradiction in argumentation frameworks. In: Proc. of IPMU 2002, pp. 83–90. Annecy, France (2002)
Dubois, D.: Belief structures, possibility theory and decomposable confidence measures on finite sets. Computers and Artificial Intelligence 5(5), 403–416 (1986)
Dubois, D., Fargier, H.: An axiomatic framework for order of magnitude confi- dence relations. In: Proceedings of UAI 2004, pp. 138–145 (2004)
Grabisch, M.: The Moebius transform on symmetric ordered structures and its application to capacities on finite sets. Discrete Math 28(1-3), 17–34 (2004)
Grabisch, M., Labreuche, C.: Bi-capacities for decision making on bipolar scales. In: EUROFUSE 2002 Workshop on Information Systems, pp. 185–190 (2002)
Grabisch, M., Labreuche, C.: Bi-capacities — parts I and II. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 151(2), 211–260 (2005)
Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Slowinski, R.: Bipolar Sugeno and Choquet integrals. In: EUROFUSE 2002 Workshop on Information Systems(2002)
Halpern, J.Y.: Defining relative likelihood in partially-ordered structures. J. Artif. Intell. Res (JAIR) 7, 1–24 (1997)
Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artificial Intelligence 44(1-2), 167–207 (1990)
Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., Tannenbaum, P.H.: The Measurement of Meaning. University of Illinois Press, Chicago (1957)
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., MacGregor, D.G.: Rational actors or rational fools? implications of the a®ect heuristic for behavioral economics. The Journal of Socio-Economics 31, 329–342 (2002)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 297–323 (1992)
Wald, A.: Statistical Decision Functions. Wiley, Chichester (1950)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Dubois, D., Fargier, H. (2005). On the Qualitative Comparison of Sets of Positive and Negative Affects. In: Godo, L. (eds) Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. ECSQARU 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3571. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11518655_27
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-27326-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31888-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)