International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 955–966 | Cite as

Hesitant Fuzzy Multiattribute Matching Decision Making Based on Regret Theory with Uncertain Weights

  • Yang Lin
  • Ying-Ming WangEmail author
  • Sheng-Qun Chen


An approach based on regret theory with hesitant fuzzy analysis is presented in a context of multiattribute matching decision making where the relative weights are uncertain. There are two steps being addressed in this approach. First, we put forward a maximizing differential model to determine the relative weights of hesitant fuzzy attributes, and calculate collective utilities of each attribute according to regret theory. The matching satisfaction degrees (MSDs) are then acquired by aggregating the collective utilities with relative weights. Secondly, an optimal matching model is programmed to generate the matching results based on the MSDs. This model belongs to a sort of multiobjective assignment problem and can be solved using the min–max method. A case study of matching outsourcing contractors and providers in Fuzhou National Hi-tech Zone is conducted to demonstrate the proposed approach and its potential applications.


Matching decision making Hesitant fuzzy set Regret theory Maximizing differential method Matching satisfaction degree Optimization model 



The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to anonymous referees and editors for their insightful and constructive comments, which have helped to improve the paper. This work was partly supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant 71371053, and the Social Science Foundation of Fujian Province under FJ2015C111.


  1. 1.
    Gale, D., Shapley, L.S.: College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am. Math. Mon. 69(1), 9–15 (1962)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roth, A.E., Sotomayor, M.: The college admissions problem revisited. Econometrica 57(3), 559–570 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roth, A.E.: Common and conflicting interests in two-sided matching markets. Eur. Econ. Rev. 27(1), 75–96 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee, S., Yongtae, P.: The classification and strategic management of services in e-commerce: development of service taxonomy based on customer perception. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(6), 9618–9624 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abdulkadiroğlu, A., Pathak, P.A., Roth, A.E.: The New York city high school match. Am. Econ. Rev. 95(2), 364–367 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jiang, Z.Z., Lp, W.H., Lau, H.C.W.: Multi-objective optimization matching for one-shot multi-attribute exchanges with quantity discounts in brokerage. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(4), 4169–4180 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huang, D.K., Chiu, H.N., Yeh, R.H., Chang, J.H.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for solving a bi-objective personnel assignment problem. Comput. Ind. Eng. 56(1), 1–10 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wan, S.P., Li, D.F.: Fuzzy LINMAP approach to heterogeneous MADM considering comparisons of alternatives with hesitation degrees. Omega 41(6), 925–940 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morente-Molinera, J.A., Pérez, I.J., Ureña, M.R., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Building and managing fuzzy ontologies with heterogeneous linguistic information. Knowl. Based Syst. 88, 154–164 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Riera, J.V., Massanet, S., Herrera-Viedma, E., Torrens, J.: Some interesting properties of the fuzzy linguistic model based on discrete fuzzy numbers to manage hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. Appl. Soft Comput. 36, 383–391 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Torra, V.: Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(6), 529–539 (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xu, Z.S., Zhang, X.: Hesitant fuzzy multi-attribute decision making based on TOPSIS with incomplete weight information. Knowl. Based Syst. 52(6), 53–64 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dong, Y., Chen, X., Herrera, F.: Minimizing adjusted simple terms in the consensus reaching process with hesitant linguistic assessments in group decision making. Inf. Sci. 297(5), 95–117 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dong, Y., Zhang, H., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Integrating experts’ weights generated dynamically into the consensus reaching process and its applications in managing non-cooperative behaviors. Decis. Support Syst. 84, 1–15 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perez, I.J., Cabrerizo, F.J., Alonso, S., Herrera-Viedma, E.: A new consensus model for group decision making problems with non-homogeneous experts. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 44(4), 494–498 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chiclana, F., García, J.M.T., Moral, M.J.D., Herrera Viedma, E.: A statistical comparative study of different similarity measures of consensus in group decision making. Inf. Sci. 221(2), 110–123 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Placek, M., Rajkumar, B.: Storage exchange: a global trading platform for storage services. In: Euro-Par Parallel Processing, pp. 425–436 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Engel, Y., Wellman, M.P., Lochner, K.M.: Bid expressiveness and clearing algorithms in multiattribute double auctions. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 110–119 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hwang, H.S., Ko, W.H., Goanl, M.J.: Web-based multi-attribute analysis model for make-or-buy decisions. Math. Comput. Model. 46(7), 1081–1090 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen, S.Q., Wang, Y.M.: Rank belief degrees fusion method for multi-attribute matching decision making. J. Syst. Eng. 30(1), 25–33 (2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neumann, J.L.V., Morgenstern, O.V.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. University Press Princeton, Princeton (1947)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hardie, G.S., Eric, J.J., Peter, S.F.: Modeling loss aversion and reference dependence effects on brand choice. Market Sci. 12(4), 378–394 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Loomes, G., Sugden, R.: Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Econ. J. 92(368), 805–824 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bell, D.E.: Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Oper. Res. 30(5), 961–981 (1982)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bleichrodt, H., Cillo, A., Diecidue, E.: A quantitative measurement of regret theory. Manag. Sci. 56(1), 161–175 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xia, M.M., Xu, Z.S.: Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision making. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 52(3), 395–407 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xia, M.M., Xu, Z.S., Chen, N.: Some hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators with their application in group decision making. Group Decis. Negot. 22(2), 259–279 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Farhadinia, B.: Study on division and subtraction operations for hesitant fuzzy sets, interval-valued hesitant fuzzy sets and typical dual hesitant fuzzy sets. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 28(3), 1393–1402 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Xu, Z.S., Xia, M.M.: Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf. Sci. 181(11), 2128–2138 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xu, Z.S., Xia, M.M.: On distance and correlation measures of hesitant fuzzy information. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 26, 410–425 (2011)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roth, A.E., Uriel, G.R.: Stable matchings, optimal assignments, and linear programming. Math. Oper. Res. 18(4), 803–828 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chorus, C.G.: Regret theory-based route choices and traffic equilibria. Transportmetrica 8(4), 291–305 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Application. Springer, Berlin (1981)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang, Y.M., Fan, Z.P.: Fuzzy preference relations: aggregation and weight determination. Comput. Ind. Eng. 53(1), 163–172 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fan, Z.P., Li, M.Y.: Decision analysis method for two-sided satisfied matching considering stable matching condition. Chin. J. Manag. Sci. 22(4), 113–118 (2009)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fan, Z.P., Yue, Q.: Strict two-sided matching method based on complete preference ordinal information. J. Manag. Sci. 17(1), 21–34 (2014)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rothblum, U.G.: Characterization of stable matchings as extreme points of a polytope. Math. Program. 54(3), 57–67 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li, D.F., Wan, S.P.: Fuzzy linear programming approach to multiattribute decision making with multiple types of attribute values and incomplete weight information. Appl. Soft Comput. 13(11), 4333–4348 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Echenique, F.: What matchings can be stable? The testable implications of matching theory. Math. Oper. Res. 33(3), 757–768 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S.: Satisfaction degree based interactive decision making under hesitant fuzzy environment with incomplete weights. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness 22(4), 553–572 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rodriguez, R.M., Bedregal, B., Bustince, H., Dong, Y.C., et al.: A position and perspective analysis of hesitant fuzzy sets on information fusion in decision making. Towards high quality progress. Inf. Sci. 29, 89–97 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision Sciences InstituteFuzhou UniversityFuzhouChina
  2. 2.School of EconomicsFujian Normal UniversityFuzhouChina
  3. 3.School of Electronic Information ScienceFujianjiangxia UniversityFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations