Managing consistency and consensus in group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations

Omega (United Kingdom)

Volumn 65, Issue , 2016, Pages 28-40

  Wu, Zhibin ^a   Xu, Jiuping ^a  

^a Sichuan University   (China)

Author keywords

Consensus; Consistency; Group decision making; Hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relation; Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; LINGUISTICS;

CONSENSUS; CONSISTENCY; FUZZY LINGUISTIC PREFERENCE RELATIONS; GROUP DECISION MAKING; HESITANT FUZZY LINGUISTIC PREFERENCE RELATION; HESITANT FUZZY LINGUISTIC TERM SETS; INDIVIDUAL RATIONALITY; PAIR-WISE COMPARISON; POSSIBILITY DISTRIBUTIONS; QUALITATIVE DECISION MAKING;

DECISION MAKING;

CALCULATION; CONSENSUS; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DECISION MAKING; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INVESTMENT; MODEL;

EID: 84952913309     PISSN: 03050483     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.005     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. [1] Ureña, R., Chiclana, F., Morente-Molinera, J.A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Managing incomplete preference relations in decision making: a review and future trends. Information Sciences 302 (2015), 14–32.
2. [2] Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F.J., Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Group decision making with incomplete fuzzy linguistic preference relations. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 24:2 (2009), 201–222.
3. [3] Dong, Y.C., Herrera-Viedma, E., Consistency-driven automatic methodology to set interval numerical scales of 2-tuple linguistic term sets and its use in the linguistic GDM with preference relation. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 45:4 (2015), 780–792.
4. [4] Wu, Z.B., Xu, J.P., Consensus reaching models of linguistic preference relations based on distance functions. Soft Computing 16:4 (2012), 577–589.
5. [5] Xu, Z.S., Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making. Omega 33:3 (2005), 249–254.
6. [6] Herrera, F., Alonso, S., Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Computing with words in decision making: foundations, trends and prospects. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making 8:4 (2009), 337–364.
7. [7] Li, Z.M., Xu, J.P., Lev, B., Gang, J., Multi-criteria group individual research output evaluation based on context-free grammar judgments with assessing attitude. Omega 57 (2015), 282–293.
8. [8] Merigó JM, Palacios-Marqué D, Zeng SZ. Subjective and objective information in linguistic multi-criteria group decision making. European Journal of Operational Research 2016; 248 (2):522–31.
9. [9] Morente-Molinera, J.A., Pérez, I.J., Ureña, M.R., Herrera-Viedma, E., On multi-granular fuzzy linguistic modeling in group decision making problems: a systematic review. Knowledge-Based Systems 74 (2015), 49–60.
10. [10] Hatami-Marbini, A., Tavana, M., An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment. Omega 39:4 (2011), 373–386.
11. [11] Martínez, L., Herrera, F., An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: extensions, applications and challenges. Information Sciences 207 (2012), 1–18.
12. [12] Mendel, J.M., Wu, D.R., Perceptual computing aiding people in making subjective judgments. 2010, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
13. [13] Pedrycz, W., Al-Hmouz, R., Morfeq, A., Balamash, A.S., Building granular fuzzy decision support systems. Knowledge-Based Systems 58 (2014), 3–10.
14. [14] Pang, J.F., Liang, J.Y., Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information. Omega 40:3 (2012), 294–301.
15. [15] Rodríguez, R.M., Martínez, L., Herrera, F., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 20:1 (2012), 109–119.
16. [16] Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Approaches to manage hesitant fuzzy linguistic information based on the cosine distance and similarity measures for HFLTSs and their application in qualitative decision making. Expert Systems with Applications 42 (2015), 5328–5336.
17. [17] Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J., Merigó, J.M., Qualitative decision making with correlation coefficients of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Knowledge-Based Systems 76 (2015), 127–138.
18. [18] Rodriguez, R.M., Martínez, L., Herrera, F., A group decision making model dealing with comparative linguistic expressions based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Information Sciences 241 (2013), 28–42.
19. [19] Wei, C.P., Zhao, N., Tang, X.J., Operators and comparisons of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22:3 (2014), 575–585.
20. [20] Liu, H.B., Rodríguez, R.M., A fuzzy envelope for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application to multicriteria decision making. Information Sciences 258 (2014), 220–238.
21. [21] Wu, Z.B., Xu, J.P., Possibility distribution based approach for MAGDM with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 2015, 10.1109/TCYB.2015.2413894.
22. [22] Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J., Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making. Information Sciences 271 (2014), 125–142.
23. [23] Beg, I., Rashid, T., TOPSIS for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 28:12 (2013), 1162–1171.
24. [24] Wang, J.Q., Wang, J., Chen, Q.H., Zhang, H.Y., Chen, X.H., An outranking approach for multi-criteria decision-making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Inf Sci 280 (2014), 338–351.
25. [25] Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic VIKOR method and its application in qualitative multiple criteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 23:5 (2012), 1343–1355.
26. [26] Yavuz, M., Oztaysi, B., Cevik Onar, S., Kahraman, C., Multi-criteria evaluation of alternative-fuel vehicles via a hierarchical hesitant fuzzy linguistic model. Expert Systems with Applications 42 (2015), 2835–2848.
27. [27] Brunelli, M., Fedrizzi, M., Boundary properties of the inconsistency of pairwise comparisons in group decisions. European Journal of Operational Research 240:3 (2015), 765–773.
28. [28] Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., Herrera, F., Cardinal consistency of reciprocal preference relations: a characterization of multiplicative transitivity. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 17:1 (2009), 14–23.
29. [29] Escobar, M.T., Aguarón, J., Moreno-Jiménez, J.M., Some extensions of the precise consistency consensus matrix. Decision Support Systems 74 (2015), 67–77.
30. [30] Kwiesielewicz, M., van Uden, E., Inconsistent and contradictory judgements in pairwise comparison method in the AHP. Computers and Operations Research 31:5 (2004), 713–719.
31. [31] Rezaei, J., Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53 (2015), 49–57.
32. [32] Cao, D., Leung, L.C., Law, J.S., Modifying inconsistent comparison matrix in analytic hierarchy process: a heuristic approach. Decision Support Systems 44:4 (2008), 944–953.
33. [33] Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process. 1980, McGraw-Hill, New York.
34. [34] Tanino, T., Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 12:2 (1984), 117–131.
35. [35] Saaty, T.L., Decision-making with the AHP: why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European Journal of Operational Research 145:1 (2003), 85–91.
36. [36] Liu, X.W., Pan, Y.W., Xu, Y.J., Yu, S., Least square completion and inconsistency repair methods for additively consistent fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 198 (2012), 1–19.
37. [37] Xia, M.M., Xu, Z.S., Chen, J., Algorithms for improving consistency or consensus of reciprocal [0,1]-valued preference relations. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 216 (2013), 108–133.
38. [38] Dong, Y.C., Xu, Y.F., Li, H.Y., On consistency measures of linguistic preference relations. European Journal of Operational Research 189:2 (2008), 430–444.
39. [39] Xu, Z.S., Liao, H.C., Intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22:4 (2014), 749–761.
40. [40] Xu, Z.S., Xia, M.M., Iterative algorithms for improving consistency of intuitionistic preference relations. Journal of the Operational Research Society 65:5 (2014), 708–722.
41. [41] Xu, Z.S., Liao, H.C., The multiplicative consistency index of hesitant fuzzy preference relation. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2015, 10.1109/TFUZZ.2015.2426315.
42. [42] Xu, Y.J., Gupta, J.N.D., Wang, H.M., The ordinal consistency of an incomplete reciprocal preference relation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 246 (2014), 62–77.
43. [43] Altuzarra, A., Moreno-Jiménez, J.M., Salvador, M., Consensus building in AHP-group decision making: a Bayesian approach. Operations Research 58:6 (2010), 1755–1773.
44. [44] Bouzarour-Amokrane, Y., Tchangani, A., Peres, F., A bipolar consensus approach for group decision making problems. Expert Systems with Applications 42:3 (2015), 1759–1772.
45. [45] Franceschini, F., Maisano, D., Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems. Omega 57 (2015), 188–195.
46. [46] Gong, Z.W., Xu, X.X., Zhang, H.H., Ozturk, U.A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Xu, C., The consensus models with interval preference opinions and their economic interpretation. Omega 55 (2015), 81–90.
47. [47] Gong, Z.W., Zhang, H.H., Jeffrey, F., Li, L.S., Xu, X.X., Two consensus models based on the minimum cost and maximum return regarding either all individuals or one individual. European Journal of Operational Research 240:1 (2015), 183–192.
48. [48] Liu, F., Zhang, W.G., TOPSIS-based consensus model for group decision-making with incomplete interval fuzzy preference relations. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 44:8 (2014), 1283–1294.
49. [49] Plastria, F., Blockmans, T., Multidimensional theoretic consensus reachability: the impact of distance selection and issue saliences. Group Decision and Negotiation 24:1 (2015), 1–44.
50. [50] Roselló, L., Sánchez, M., Agell, N., Prats, F., Mazaira, F.A., Using consensus and distances between generalized multi-attribute linguistic assessments for group decision-making. Information Fusion 17 (2014), 83–92.
51. [51] Xia, M.M., Chen, J., Consistency and consensus improving methods for pairwise comparison matrices based on Abelian linearly ordered group. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 266 (2015), 1–32.
52. [52] Cabrerizo, F.J., Pérez, I.J., Herrera-Viedma, E., Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information. Knowledge-Based Systems 23:2 (2010), 169–181.
53. [53] Dong, Y.C., Li, C.C., Xu, Y.F., Gu, X., Consensus-based group decision making under multi-granular unbalanced 2-tuple linguistic preference relations. Group Decision and Negotiation 24:2 (2015), 217–242.
54. [54] Herrera-Viedma, E., Martínez, L., Mata, F., Chiclana, F., A consensus support systems model for group decision making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 13:5 (2005), 746–752.
55. [55] Palomares, I., Rodríguez, R.M., Martínez, L., An attitude-driven web consensus support system for heterogeneous group decision making. Expert Systems with Applications 40:1 (2013), 139–149.
56. [56] Palomares, I., Estrella, F.J., Martínez, L., Herrera, F., Consensus under a fuzzy context: taxonomy, analysis framework AFRYCA and experimental case of study. nformation Fusion 20 (2014), 252–271.
57. [57] Palomares, I., Rodríguez, R.M., Martínez, L., A semi-supervised multi-agent system model to support consensus reaching processes. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22:4 (2014), 762–777.
58. [58] Pérez, I.J., Cabrerizo, F.J., Alonso, S., Herrera-Viedma, E., A new consensus model for group decision making problems with nonhomogeneous experts. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 44:4 (2014), 494–498.
59. [59] Cabrerizo, F.J., Moreno, J.M., Pérez, I.J., Herrera-Viedma, E., Analyzing consensus approaches in fuzzy group decision making: advantages and drawbacks. Soft Computing 14:5 (2010), 451–463.
60. [60] Herrera-Viedma, E., Cabrerizo, F.J., Kacprzyk, J., Pedrycz, W., A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment. Information Fusion 17 (2014), 4–13.
61. [61] Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J., Merigó, J.M., Framework of group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference information. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 23:4 (2015), 1211–1227.
62. [62] Zhu, B., Xu, Z.S., Consistency measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 24:1 (2014), 72–85.
63. [63] Zhang, Z.M., Wu, C., On the use of multiplicative consistency in hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Knowledge-Based Systems 72 (2014), 13–27.
64. [64] Wang, H., Xu, Z.S., Some consistency measures of extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Information Sciences 297 (2015), 316–331.
65. [65] Rodríguez, R.M., Bedregal, B., Bustince, H., Dong, Y.C., Farhadinia, B., Kahraman, C., et al. A position and perspective anal- ysis of hesitant fuzzy sets on information fusion in decision making. Towards high quality progress. Information Fusion 29 (2016), 89–97.
66. [66] Dong, Y.C., Chen, X., Herrera, F., Minimizing adjusted simple terms in the consensus reaching process with hesitant linguistic assessments in group decision making. Information Sciences 297 (2015), 95–117.
67. [67] Torra, V., Hesitant fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 25:6 (2010), 529–539.
68. [68] Bedregal, B., Reiser, R., Bustince, H., Lopez-Molina, C., Torra, V., Aggregation functions for typical hesitant fuzzy elements and the action of automorphisms. Information Sciences 255 (2014), 82–99.
69. [69] Rodríguez, R.M., Martínez, L., Torra, V., Xu, Z.S., Herrera, F., Hesitant fuzzy sets: state of the art and future directions. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 29:6 (2014), 495–524.
70. [70] Zadeh, L.A., Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1 (1978), 3–28.
71. [71] Dubois, D., Prade, H., The legacy of 50 years of fuzzy sets: a discussion. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 281 (2015), 21–31.
72. [72] Wang, J.H., Hao, J.Y., A new version of 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 14:3 (2006), 435–445.
73. [73] Zhang, G.Q., Dong, Y.C., Xu, Y.F., Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments. Information Fusion 17 (2014), 46–55.
74. [74] Herrera, F., Martínez, L., A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 8:6 (2000), 746–752.
75. [75] Dong, Y.C., Xu, Y.F., Yu, S., Computing the numerical scale of the linguistic term set for the 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 17:6 (2009), 1366–1378.
76. [76] Liu, H.B., Cai, J.F., Jiang, L., On improving the additive consistency of the fuzzy preference relations based on comparative linguistic expressions. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 29:6 (2014), 544–559.
77. [77] Chiclana, F., Mata, F., Martínez, L., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., Integration of a consistency control module with in a consensus decision making model. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 16:Suppl. 1 (2009), 35–53.
78. [78] Lehrer, K., Wagner, C., Rational consensus in science and society: a philosophical and mathematical study. 1981, Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht, Holland.
79. [79] Xu, Z.S., Liao, H.C., A survey of approaches to decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Knowledge-Based Systems 80 (2015), 131–142.
80. [80] Mata, F., Pérez, L.G., Zhou, S.M., Chiclana. Type-1 OWA methodology to consensus reaching processes in multi-granular linguistic contexts. Knowledge-Based Systems 58 (2014), 11–22.
81. [81] Zhang, Z., Guo, C.H., Consistency and consensus models for group decision-making with uncertain 2-tuple linguistic preference relations. International Journal of Systems Science, 2015, 10.1080/00207721.2014.999732.
82. [82] Sun, B.Z., Ma, W.M., An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application. Omega 51 (2015), 83–92.