Managing consensus and self-confidence in multiplicative preference relations in group decision making
Introduction
Group Decision Making (GDM) can be defined as a situation where a group of decision makers participate in a decision process, provide their opinions regarding the given alternatives, and select the best alternative(s) by the aggregation of their opinions. Preference relation is one of the most widely used preference representation structures in GDM [52]. Several different types of preference relations have been proposed in the literature, such as additive preference relations (also called fuzzy preference relations) (e.g., [15], [24], [44], [45], [50]), multiplicative preference relations (e.g., [47], [48], [49]), linguistic preference relations (e.g., [17], [37], [55]).
Recently, a new kind of preference relation has been proposed by considering self-confidence levels in the preference relation, which is named by self-confident preference relation [40]. In Ureña et al. [51], the concept of self-confidence level was introduced based on the hesitancy degree of the reciprocal intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation, and a new aggregation operator was proposed by taking into account both the consistency level and the confidence level. Formally, Liu et al. [40] proposed self-confident multiplicative, additive, and linguistic preference relations through investigation of the self-confident preference relations under the heterogeneous context. Each element of the self-confident preference relations consists of two components: the first part is the preference evaluation between pairs of alternatives, and the second part represents the decision maker's self-confidence level of the first part (i.e., preference evaluation) and it is often defined on a rating scale (numerical scale or linguistic scale).
Although some preliminary works have been made regarding GDM with self-confident preference relations, the consensus issue is not considered in the literature. In practical GDM problems, two processes are often carried out to obtain a final collective solution: 1) the consensus process and 2) the selection process. The consensus process is adopted to improve the consensus level among a group of decision makers, and the selection process is applied to obtain a collective ranking of alternatives. Traditionally, consensus is defined as the full and unanimous agreement of all the decision makers regarding all the feasible alternatives. However, in real life, a complete agreement may be difficult to achieve, and it may not always necessary in practice. This belief has led to the use of the “soft” consensus (e.g., [31], [34]). So far, a large number of studies based on ‘‘soft’ ’ consensus have been reported, which can be classified into the following categories [21]:
- (1)
Consensus models with different preference representation structures (e.g., [2], [3], [9], [10], [30], [32], [33], [35], [41]). For instance, Kacprzyk et al. [35] proposed a consensus building model for GDM with additive preference relations. Altuzarra et al. [3] proposed a consensus building model for GDM with incomplete preference relations. Alonso et al. [2] presented a novel consensus building model which uses linguistic preference relations to support consensus in new Web 2.0 Communities.
- (2)
Consensus models based on consistency and consensus measures (e.g., [12], [17], [58], [62]). For example, Chiclana et al. [12] proposed a consensus building model for GDM problems that proceeds from consistency to consensus. Zhang et al. [62] and Wu and Xu [58] developed consensus building models that simultaneously manage individual the consistency and consensus.
- (3)
Consensus models considering the behaviors/attitudes of decision makers (e.g., [22], [42], [46], [53], [54], [55], [56], [60]). Palomares et al. [42], Quesada et al. [46] and Xu et al. [60] all have studied the consensus building models by addressing non-cooperative behaviors of the decision makers. Meanwhile, Wu and Chiclana [53] and Wu et al. [55] have proposed trust-based consensus building models.
- (4)
Consensus models under dynamic/Web contexts (e.g., [1], [16], [36], [44]). Pérez et al. [44] proposed a dynamic consensus building model to manage decision situations in which the set of alternatives changes dynamically. Alonso et al. [1] and Kacprzyk and Zadrozny [36] investigated web-based consensus support systems. Dong et al. [16] proposed a consensus building model for the dynamic GDM problem.
- (5)
Consensus models with minimum adjustments or cost (e.g., [6], [7], [19], [26], [63]). Ben-Arieh and Easton [6] presented a consensus building model with minimum cost, which was subsequently extended to a maximum number of decision makers consensus model in Ben-Arieh et al. [7]. Meanwhile, Dong et al. [19] proposed a consensus building models with minimum adjustments under the linguistic context. Recently, the consensus building model with minimum cost has been pursued by Gong et al. [26] and Zhang et al. [63].
- (6)
Consensus models for GDM with multiple attributes (e.g., [21], [59], [61], [63]). For example, Xu et al. [61] proposed a consensus approach for eliminating conflicts in emergency multiple attribute GDM problems. Recently, Dong et al. [21] reported a consensus building model for a complex and dynamic multiple attribute GDM problem.
The above literature review shows that the existing consensus models have made considerable progress. However, they are incapable of handling GDM with self-confident preference relations due to the complexity of this kind of decision problem. Motived by the challenge to deal with the consensus issue in the GDM with self-confident preference relations, this study continues the research line of Ureña et al. [51] and Liu et al. [40] and proposes a novel iteration-based consensus building framework to manage consensus and self-confidence in the GDM with multiplicative preference relations. In this framework, an extended logarithmic least squares method is used in the selection process to derive individual and collective priority vectors from self-confident multiplicative preference relations. Then, a two-step feedback adjustment mechanism in the consensus process is proposed, which adjusts both the preference values and the self-confidence levels to help the decision makers to improve the consensus level. Following this, a simulation experiment is put forward for measuring the consensus efficiency of the novel consensus building model.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces preliminaries regarding the 2-tuple linguistic model, multiplicative preference relations, logarithmic least squares method and self-confident multiplicative preference relations. Then, Section 3 develops a novel consensus building framework for GDM with self-confident multiplicative preference relations. In Section 4, a consensus process is presented to improve the consensus level among the decision makers. An illustrative example is given in Section 5. Next, Section 6 proposes the simulation method to measure the consensus efficiency of the novel consensus building model. Finally, concluding remarks and future research directions are discussed in Section 7.
Section snippets
Preliminaries
This section offers the preliminary knowledge regarding the 2-tuple linguistic model, multiplicative preference relations, logarithmic least squares method and self-confident multiplicative preference relations, which are closely related to this study.
The consensus building framework based on self-confident multiplicative preference relations
This section presents an iteration-based consensus building framework for GDM problems with self-confident multiplicative preference relations.
The consensus process with novel feedback adjustment mechanism
As introduced in Section 3, both the preference values and self-confident levels are modified in the proposed consensus building model to achieve a consensus. In other words, the proposed consensus building model is a Preference Values and Self-confident Levels Modifying based Consensus Model, which is abbreviated as PVSLM-based consensus model for convenience. PVSLM-based consensus model includes two steps: consensus measure and feedback adjustment, which are presented in this section.
Illustrative example
This section uses an illustrative example to show the application of the proposed consensus building framework in the GDM with the self-confident multiplicative preference relations.
In this example, we assume that a set of four decision makers and a set of five alternatives are involved. Here, we assume that all decision makers have different weights, i.e.,. When decision makers provide self-confident multiplicative preference relations
Simulation and comparison experiment
This section presents a comparison experiment to investigate the validity of the proposed consensus building framework.
Conclusion
In this paper, we investigate the consensus-based GDM problem with self-confident multiplicative preference relations. The main contributions are as follows.
- (1)
Self-confident multiplicative preference relation is a new kind of preference relation, which allows decision makers to express their preferences with multiple self-confidence levels. This paper proposes a novel iteration-based consensus building framework for GDM problems with self-confident multiplicative preference relations.
- (2)
The
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the grant (No. 2017B07514) from “The Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities”.
References (64)
- et al.
A web based consensus support system for group decision making problems and incomplete preferences
Inf. Sci.
(2010) - et al.
A linguistic consensus model for Web 2.0 communities
Appl. Soft Comput.
(2013) - et al.
Multi-criteria group consensus under linear cost opinion elasticity
Decis. Support Syst.
(2007) - et al.
Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information
Knowl.-Based Syst.
(2010) - et al.
The fusion process with heterogeneous preference structures in group decision making: A survey
Inf. Fusion
(2015) - et al.
A statistical comparative study of different similarity measures of consensus in group decision making
Inf. Sci.
(2013) - et al.
A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices
J. Math. Psycho.
(1985) - et al.
Managing consensus based on leadership in opinion dynamics
Inf. Sci.
(2017) - et al.
Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making
Omega
(2018) - et al.
The OWA-based consensus operator under linguistic representation models using position indexes
Euro. J. Oper. Res.
(2010)
A survey on the fusion process in opinion dynamics
Inf. Fusion
Consensus reaching model in the complex and dynamic MAGDM problem
Knowl.-Based Syst.
Consensus modeling with nonlinear utility and cost constraints
Knowl.-Based Syst.
A new measure of consensus with fuzzy preference relations: The correlation consensus degree
Knowl.-Based Syst.
A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment
Inf. Fusion
A ‘soft’ measure of consensus in the setting of partial (fuzzy) preferences
Eur. J. Oper. Res.
Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority
Fuzzy Sets Syst.
Personalized individual semantics in computing with words for supporting linguistic group decision making. An application on consensus reaching
Inf. Fusion
Multiattribute group decision making based on intuitionistic 2-tuple linguistic information
Inf. Sci.
Consensus under a fuzzy context: Taxonomy, analysis framework AFRYCA and experimental case of study
Inf. Fusion
Managing experts behavior in large-scale consensus reaching processes with uninorm aggregation operators
Applied Soft Comput.
Combining different prioritization methods in the analytic hierarchy process synthesis
Comput. Oper. Res.
Synthesis of individual best local priority vectors in AHP-group decision making
Appl. Soft Comput.
Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making
Fuzzy Sets Syst.
Confidence-consistency driven group decision making approach with incomplete reciprocal intuitionistic preference relations
Knowl.- Based Syst.
Managing incomplete preference relations in decision making: A review and future trends
Inf. Sci.
A social network analysis trust–consensus based approach to group decision-making problems with interval-valued fuzzy reciprocal preference relations
Knowl.-Based Syst.
A visual interaction consensus model for social network group decision making with trust propagation
Knowl. Syst.
Trust based consensus model for social network in an incomplete linguistic information context
Appl. Soft Comput.
Uninorm trust propagation and aggregation methods for group decision making in social network with four tuple information
Knowl.-Based Syst.
A consistency and consensus based decision support model for group decision making with multiplicative preference relations
Decis. Supp. Syst.
Managing consistency and consensus in group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations
Omega
Cited by (44)
Conflict management-based consensus reaching process considering conflict relationship clustering in large-scale group decision-making problems
2024, Expert Systems with ApplicationsRisk assessment based on failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and WASPAS methods under probabilistic double hierarchy linguistic term sets
2023, Computers and Industrial EngineeringThe influence of social embedding on belief system and its application in online public opinion guidance
2023, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications