Soft consensus measures in group decision making using unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information
- 559 Downloads
An important question in group decision-making situations is how to estimate the consensus achieved within the group of decision makers. Dictionary meaning of consensus is a general and unanimous agreement among a group of individuals. However, most of the approaches deal with a more realistic situation of partial agreement. Defining a partial agreement of decision makers as a consensus up to some degree, the following question is how to obtain that soft degree of consensus. To do so, different approaches, in which the decision makers express their opinions by using symmetrical and uniformly distributed linguistic term sets, have been proposed. However, there exist situations in which the opinions are represented using unbalanced fuzzy linguistic term sets, in which the linguistic terms are not uniform and symmetrically distributed around the midterm. The aim of this paper was to study how to adapt the existing approaches obtaining soft consensus measures to handle group decision-making situations in which unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information is used. In addition, the advantages and drawbacks of these approaches are analyzed.
KeywordsGroup decision making Consensus Unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information
This Project was funded by King Abdulaziz University (KAU), under Grant No. (27-135-35/HiCi). The authors, therefore, acknowledge technical and financial support of KAU.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and animal rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- Butler CT, Rothstein A (2006) On conflict and consensus: a handbook on formal consensus decision making. Food Not Bombs Publishing, Takoma ParkGoogle Scholar
- Cabrerizo FJ, Alonso S, Herrera-Viedma E (2009) A consensus model for group decision making problems with unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 8:109–131Google Scholar
- Cabrerizo FJ, Heradio R, Pérez IJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010a) A selection process based on additive consistency to deal with incomplete fuzzy linguistic information. J Univers Comput Sci 16:62–81Google Scholar
- D’Aniello G, Loia V, Orciuoli F (2015a) Employing fuzzy consensus for assessing reliability of sensor data in situation awareness frameworks. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, pp 2591–2596Google Scholar
- Estrella FJ, Espinilla M, Martínez L (2014) Fuzzy linguistic olive oil sensory evaluation model based on unbalanced linguistic scales. J Mult Valued Log Soft Comput 22:501–520Google Scholar
- Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Chiclana F (2002) A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 32:394–402Google Scholar
- Herrera-Viedma E, Cabrerizo FJ, Kacprzyk J, Pedrycz W (2014) A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment. Inf Fusion 17:4–13Google Scholar
- Kacprzyk J (1987) On some fuzzy cores and ‘soft’ consensus measures in group decision making. In: Bezdek JC (ed) The analysis of fuzzy information. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 119–130Google Scholar
- Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Morente-Molinera JA, Ureña R, Herrera-Viedma E (2014b) Reaching consensus in digital libraries: a linguistic approach. In: Second international conference on information technology and quantitative management (ITQM 2014), pp 449–458Google Scholar
- Wang B, Liang J, Qian Y, Dang C (2015a) A normalized numerical scaling method for the unbalanced multi-granular linguistic sets. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 23:221–243Google Scholar
- Zhou SM, Chiclana F, John R, Garibaldi J (2008) Type-1 OWA operators for aggregating uncertain information with uncertain weights induced by type-2 linguistic quantifiers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:3281–3296Google Scholar