Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 1253–1266 | Cite as

A heuristic nonlinear operator for the aggregation of incomplete judgment matrices in group decision making

  • Bo JiaoEmail author
  • Ying Zhou
  • Jing Du
  • Cheng-dong Huang
  • Jun-hu Wang
  • Bo Li


The weighted-average operator and ordered-weighted-average operators are typically used in group decision making (GDM) problems to aggregate individual expert opinions to a collective opinion. However, the existing aggregation operators pay more attentions on the determination of the weights, and neglect the information about the relationship between the values being fused. In this paper, we develop a heuristic-nonlinear-aggregation (HNA) operator based on two metrics of similarity and consistency for the GDM based on incomplete judgment matrices. The similarity and consistency respectively measure the differences between a collective matrix and two optimum matrices, i.e. the optimum similarity matrix and the optimum consistency matrix, which can be calculated by quadratic programming models and the relationship between the values being fused. The validity and practicability of the HNA operator are illustrated by numerical examples.


Group decision making (GDM) incomplete judgment matrices (IJMs) similarity consistency analytic hierarchy process (AHP) 


  1. Alonso, S., Herrera-Viedma, E., Chiclana, F., & Herrera, F. (2009). Individual and social strategies to deal with ignorance situations in multi-person decision making. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 8(2), 313–333.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Chang, K. H., & Cheng, C. H. (2011). Evaluating the risk of failure using the fuzzy OWA and DEMATEL method. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(2), 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, S. M., & Lee, L. W. (2012). Autocratic decision making using group recommendations based on the ILLOWA operator and likelihood-based comparison relations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 42(1), 115–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chiclana, F., Mata, F., Martinez, L., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Alonso, S. (2008). Integration of a consistency control module within a consensus model. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 16, 35–53.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Alonso, S. (2009). A note on two methods for estimating missing pairwise preference values. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part B: Cybernetics, 39(6), 1628–1633.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Despotis, D. K., & Derpanis, D. (2008). A min-max goal programming approach to priority derivation in AHP with interval judgements. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 7(1), 175–182.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Dong, Y. C., Xu, Y. F., Li, H. Y., & Dai, M. (2008). A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 186, 229–242.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Dong, Y. C., Xu, Y. F., & Yu, S. (2009). Linguistic multiperson decision making based on the use of multiple preference relations. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 160, 603–623.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Dong, Y. C., Hong, W. C., Xu, Y. F., & Yu, S. (2011). Selecting the individual numerical scale and prioritization method in the analytic hierarchy process: A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic approach. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 19(1), 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dong, Y. C., Hong, W. C., Xu, Y. F., & Yu, S. (2013). Numerical scales generated individually for analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 229, 654–666.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fedrizzi, M., & Giove, S. (2007). Incomplete pairwise comparison and consistency optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 183, 303–313.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Gong, Y. B. (2011). A combination approach for obtaining the minimize disparity OWA operator weights. Fuzzy Optimization Decision Making, 10(4), 311–321.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Grabisch, M., Marichal, J. L., Mesiar, R., & Pap, E. (2009). Aggregation functions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., & Chiclana, F. (2002). A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 32(3), 394–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F., & Luque, M. (2004). Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 154, 98–109.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Herrera-Viedma, E., Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., & Alonso, S. (2007). Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics Part B: Cybernetics, 37(1), 176–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huang, H. X. (2003). Introduction to global optimization. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Liu, C., Ramirez-Serrano, A., & Yin, G. (2011). Customer-driven product design and evaluation method for collaborative design environments. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(5), 1751–1764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Merigo, J. M. (2012). Decision making in complex environments with generalized aggregation operators. IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence for Financial Engineering & Economics (pp. 1–7). Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  20. Pang, B., & Bai, S. (2013). An integrated fuzzy synthetic evaluation approach for supplier selection based on analytic network process. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24(1), 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 234–281.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Taha, Z., & Rostam, S. (2012). A hybrid fuzzy AHP-PROMETHEE decision support system for machine tool selection in flexible manufacturing cell. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 23(6), 2137–2149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tao, Q., Wang, C. B., & Fang, T. J. (1998). A neural network model for solving quadratic programming problems on closed convex sets. Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 11(1), 7–11. Google Scholar
  25. Xu, Z. S. (2004). Incomplete complementary judgement matrix. System Engineering Theory & Practice, 24(6), 93–97.Google Scholar
  26. Xu, Z. S. (2004). Goal programming models for obtaining the priority vector of incomplete fuzzy preference relation. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 36, 261–270.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Xu, Z. S. (2005). A procedure for decision making based on incomplete fuzzy preference relation. Fuzzy Optimization Decision Making, 4(3), 175–189.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Xu, Z. S., & Yager, R. R. (2010). Power-geometric operators and their use in group decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 18(1), 94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. Journal of IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18(1), 183–190.Google Scholar
  30. Yager, R. R. (1996). Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 11(1), 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yager, R. R., & Filev, D. P. (1998). Operations for granular computing: Mixing words and numbers (pp. 123–128). Anchorage, AK: IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence.Google Scholar
  32. Yager, R. R. (2001). The power average operator. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans, 31(6), 724–731.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zarghami, M., Szidarovszky, F., & Ardakanian, R. (2008). A fuzzy-stochastic OWA model for robust multi-criteria decision making. Fuzzy Optimization Decision Making, 7(1), 1–15.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang, G. Q., Dong, Y. C., & Xu, Y. F. (2012). Linear optimization modeling of consistency issues in fuzzy group decision making. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 2415–2420.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bo Jiao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ying Zhou
    • 1
  • Jing Du
    • 1
  • Cheng-dong Huang
    • 1
  • Jun-hu Wang
    • 2
  • Bo Li
    • 1
  1. 1.Luoyang Electronic Equipment Test CenterLuoyangChina
  2. 2.Beijing Institute of System EngineeringBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations