Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Soft computing and Web intelligence for supporting consensus reaching

  • Focus
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A novel idea and architecture of a group decision support system for reaching consensus in a group of individuals (agents) is proposed. The core of the system is the preferences modeling and consensus assessment module, which is based on fuzzy logic. However, the focus is on providing the members of the group with an information- and knowledge-rich environment, and tools to make an effective and efficient use of such an environment. This should help the agent gain proper opinions about the issues and opinions and/or attitudes of other agents, articulate proper testimonies, actively contribute to the discussion, and finally make sound and informed decisions that can help constructively run the consensus reaching process. For this purpose modern Web-based technologies are employed and tightly integrated with the core of the system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Referring to the ontologies we adopt the terminology used by the OWL language specification (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/).

  2. http://protege.stanford.edu.

  3. http://bcisive.austhink.com/.

References

  • Amgoud L, Bonnefon JF, Prade H (2005) An argumentation-based approach to multiple criteria decision. In: Godo L (ed) ECSQARU. LNCS, vol 3571. Springer, Berlin, pp 269–280

  • Atanassov K (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:87–96

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnefon JF, Dubois D, Fargie H, Leblois S (2008) Qualitative heuristics for balancing the pros and cons. Theor Decis 65:71–95

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chesnevar C, McGinnis J, Modgil S, Rahwan I, Reed C, Simari G, South M, Vreeswijk G, Willmott S (2006) Towards an argument interchange format. Knowl Eng Rev 21(4):293–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carenini G, Moore JD (2006) Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments. Artif Intell 170(11):925–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cregan A, Schwitter R, Meyer T (2007) Sydney OWL syntax—towards a controlled natural language syntax for OWL 1.1. In: Golbreich C, Kalyanpur A, Parsia B (eds) OWLED, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol 258. http://CEUR-WS.org

  • Ding X, Liu B, Yu PS (2008) A holistic lexicon-based approach to opinion mining. In: Najork M, Broder AZ, Chakrabarti S (eds) WSDM. ACM Press, London, pp 231–240

  • Dubois D, Gottwald S, Hájek P, Kacprzyk J, Prade H (2005) Terminological difficulties in fuzzy set theory—the case of “intuitionistic fuzzy sets”. Fuzzy Sets Syst 156(3):485–491

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fedrizzi M, Kacprzyk J, Zadrożny S (1988) An interactive multi-user decision support system for consensus reaching processes using fuzzy logic with linguistic quantifiers. Decis Support Syst 4(3):313–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco LA (2008) Facilitating collaboration with problem structuring methods: a case study of an inter-organisational construction partnership. Group Decis Negot 17(4):267–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E (2000) Choice functions and mechanisms for linguistic preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 120:144–161

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera-Viedma E, Martinez L, Mata F, Chiclana F (2005a) A consensus support system model for group decision-making problems with multi-granular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 13(5):644–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrera-Viedma E, Mata F, Martínez L, Pérez LG (2005b) An adaptive module for the consensus reaching process in group decision making problems. In: Torra V, Narukawa Y, Miyamoto S (eds) MDAI. LNCS, vol 3558. Springer, Berlin, pp 89–98

  • Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay J (1996) A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets Syst 78:73–88

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jameson A, Smyth B (2007) Recommendation to groups. In: Brusilovsky P, Kobsa A, Nejdl W (eds) The adaptive Web. LNCS, vol 4321. Springer, Berlin, pp 596–627

  • Jindal N, Liu B (2006) Mining comparative sentences and relations. In: AAAI. AAAI Press, Menlo Park

  • Kacprzyk J (1987) On some fuzzy cores and “soft” consensus measures in group decision making. In: Bezdek J (ed) The analysis of fuzzy information, vol 2. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 119–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Zadrożny S (2001) Computing with words in decision making through individual and collective linguistic choice rules. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 9:89–102

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Zadrożny S (2002a) A group decision support system based on linguistic multicriteria assesments. In: Bouchon-Meunier B, Gutierrez-Rios J, Magdalena L, Yager R (eds) Technologies for constructing intelligent systems 1. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 139–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Zadrożny S (2002b) Collective choice rules in group decision making under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority: a unified owa operator based approach. Control Cybern 31(4):937–948

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Zadrożny S (2004) Linguistically quantified propositions for consensus reaching support. In: FUZZ-IEEE’2004, Budapest, Hungary, pp 1135–1140

  • Kacprzyk J, Zadrozny S (2005) Linguistic database summaries and their protoforms: towards natural language based knowledge discovery tools. Inf Sci 173(4):281–304

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Yager RR, Zadrożny S (2000) A fuzzy logic based approach to linguistic summaries of databases. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci 10:813–834

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kunz W, Rittel HWJ (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Technical Report WP-131, University of California, Berkeley

  • Kushmerick N (2000) Wrapper induction: efficiency and expressiveness. Artif Intell 118(1–2):15–68

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy C (2006) Comparatives, semantics of. In: Encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 690–694

  • Knublauch H, Fergerson RW, Noy NF, Musen MA (2004) The Protégé OWL Plugin: an open development environment for semantic web applications. In: McIlraith SA, Plexousakis D, van Harmelen F (eds) International semantic Web conference. LNCS, vol 3298. Springer, Berlin, pp 229–243

  • Lowe DG (1985) Cooperative structuring of information: the representation of reasoning and debate. Int J Man Mach Stud 23:97–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin P, Blumenstein M, Deer PJ (2005) Toward cooperatively-built knowledge repositories. In: Dau F, Mugnier ML, Stumme G (eds) ICCS. LNCS, vol 3596. Springer, Berlin, pp 411–424

  • Martin P, Jo J, Jones V (2007) Cooperatively updated knowledge bases as an optimal medium to learn, publish, evaluate and collaborate. In: Proceedings of the first international conference of ubiquitous information technology, Dubai, 12–14 February 2007, pp 875–885

  • Maybury MT, Mani I (eds) (1999) Advances in automatic text summarization. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • MIT Center for Collective Intelligence (2006). http://cci.mit.edu/research/index.html

  • Niekrasz J, Purver M, Dowding J, Peters S (2005) Ontology-based discourse understanding for a persistent meeting assistant. In: Proceedings of the 2005 AAAI spring symposium, pp 26–33

  • Paris JB (1997) A semantics for fuzzy logic. Soft Computing 1(3):143–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed C, Rowe GW (2004) Araucaria: software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. Int J AI Tools 14(3–4):961–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saint S, Lawson J (1994) Rules for reaching consensus: a modern approach to decision making. Pfeiffer

  • Schafer JB, Frankowski D, Herlocker J, Sen S (2007) Collaborative filtering recommender systems. In: Brusilovsky P, Kobsa A, Nejdl W (eds) The adaptive Web. LNCS, vol 4321. Springer, Berlin, pp 291–324

  • Schwitter R, Kaljur K, Cregan A, Dolbear C, G, H (2008) A comparison of three controlled natural languages for OWL 1.1. In: Proceedings of the OWLED 2008 workshop on OWL: experiences and directions, Washington, USA, 1–2 April 2008

  • Selvin A, Buckingham Shum S, Sierhuis M, Conklin J, Zimmermann B, Palus C, Drath W, Horth D, Domingue J, Motta E, Li G (2001) Compendium: making meetings into knowledge events. In: Proceedings of knowledge technologies 2001, Austin, TX, USA

  • Susskind LE, McKearnan S, Thomas-Larmer J (eds) (1999) The consensus building handbook: a comprehensive guide to reaching agreement. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J (2000) Intuitionistic fuzzy relations and consensus formations. Notes Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets 6:1–10

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J (2002a) Intuitionistic fuzzy relations and measures of consensus. In: Bouchon-Meunier B, Gutierrez-Rios J, Magdalena L, Yager R (eds) Technologies for constructing intelligent systems: 2 tools. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 261–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J (2002b) Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making. Control Cybern 31(4)

  • Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J (2003) A consensus-reaching process under intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Int J Intell Syst 18(7):837–852

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tempich C, Pinto HS, Sure Y, Staab S (2005) An argumentation ontology for distributed, loosely-controlled and evolving engineering processes of ontologies (DILIGENT). In: Gómez-Pérez A, Euzenat J (eds) ESWC. LNCS, vol 3532. Springer, Berlin, pp 241–256

  • Tomobe H, Nagao K (2006) Discussion ontology: Knowledge discovery from human activities in meetings. In: Washio T, Satoh K, Takeda H, Inokuchi A (eds) JSAI. LNCS, vol 4384. Springer, Berlin, pp 33–41

  • Zadeh L (1983) A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Comput Math Appl 9:149–184

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zadrożny S (1997) An approach to the consensus reaching support in fuzzy environment. In: Kacprzyk J, Nurmi H, Fedrizzi M (eds) Consensus under fuzziness. Kluwer, Boston, pp 83–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadrożny S, Kacprzyk J (2003) An internet-based group decision and consensus reaching support system. In: Yu X, Kacprzyk J (eds) Applied decision support with soft computing. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 263–275

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education under Grant N N519 404734. This work was conducted using the Protégé resource, which is supported by Grant LM007885 from the United States National Library of Medicine.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, 01-447, Warsaw, Poland

    Janusz Kacprzyk & Sławomir Zadrożny

Authors
  1. Janusz Kacprzyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sławomir Zadrożny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sławomir Zadrożny.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kacprzyk, J., Zadrożny, S. Soft computing and Web intelligence for supporting consensus reaching. Soft Comput 14, 833–846 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0475-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-009-0475-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation