Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An emergency decision making method based on the multiplicative consistency of probabilistic linguistic preference relations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the evolution of emergencies is often uncertain, it may lead to multiple emergency scenarios. According to the characteristics of emergency management, this paper proposes an emergency decision support method by using the probabilistic linguistic preference relations (PLPRs) whose elements are the pairwise comparisons of alternatives given by the decision-makers (DMs) in the form of probabilistic linguistic term sets (PLTSs). As the decision data are limited, it is difficult for the DMs to provide exact occurrence probabilities of all possible emergency scenarios. Thus, we propose a probability correction method by using the computer-aided tool named the case-based reasoning (CBR) to obtain more accurate and reasonable occurrence probabilities of the probabilistic linguistic elements (PLEs). Then, we introduce a multiplicative consistency index to judge whether a PLPR is consistent or not. Afterwards, an acceptable multiplicative consistency-based emergency decision support method is proposed to get more reliable results. Furthermore, a case study about the emergency decision making in a petrochemical plant fire accident is conducted to illustrate the proposed method. Finally, some comparative analyses are performed to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Inf Sci 8(3):199–249

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Gao J, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2017) A dynamic reference point method for emergency response under hesitant probabilistic fuzzy environment. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19(5):1261–1278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Xu ZS (2004) Uncertain linguistic aggregation operators based approach to multiple attribute group decision making under uncertain linguistic environment. Inf Sci 168(1):171–184

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Herrera F, Martinez L (2000) A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 8(6):746–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Xu ZS, Wang H (2017) On the syntax and semantics of virtual linguistic terms for information fusion in decision making. Inf Fusion 34:43–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rodriguez RM, Martinez L, Herrera F (2012) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(1):109–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pang Q, Xu ZS, Wang H (2016) Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Inf Sci 369:128–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zhang GQ, Ma J, Lu J (2009) Emergency management evaluation by a fuzzy multi-criteria group decision support system. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 23(4):517–527

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhou Q, Huang WL, Zhang Y (2011) Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Saf Sci 49(2):243–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Li Y, Hu Y, Zhang XG, Deng Y, Mahadevan S (2014) An evidential DEMATEL method to identify critical success factors in emergency management. Appl Soft Comput 22:504–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhou XY, Shi YQY, Deng XY, Deng Y (2017) D-DEMATEL: a new method to identify critical success factors in emergency management. Saf Sci 91:93–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ju YB, Wang AH, Liu XY (2012) Evaluating emergency response capacity by fuzzy AHP and 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic approach. Expert Syst Appl 39(8):6972–6981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Xu YJ, Ma F, Xu WJ, Wang HM (2015) An incomplete multi-granular linguistic model and its application in emergency decision of unconventional outburst incidents. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 29(2):619–633

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Herrera-Viedma E, Martinez L, Mata F, Chiclana F (2005) A consensus support system model for group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 13:644–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang X (2016) A method for large group decision-making based on evaluation information provided by participators from multiple groups. Inf Fusion 29:132–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Liu PD, Teng F (2018) Some Muirhead mean operators for probabilistic linguistic term sets and their applications to multiple attribute decision-making. Appl Soft Comput J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.03.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dong YC, Xu YF, Yu S (2009) Linguistic multiperson decision making based on the use of multiple preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 160:603–623

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang YX, Xu ZS, Wang H, Liao HC, Consistency-based risk assessment with probabilistic linguistic preference relation. Appl Soft Comput 49 (2016) 817–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhang YX, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2017) A consensus process for group decision making with probabilistic linguistic preference relations. Inf Sci 414:260–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Alonso S, Chiclana F, Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Alcalá-Fdez J (2008) A consistency-based procedure to estimate missing pairwise preference values. Int J Intell Syst 23(2):155–175

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang H, Xu ZS (2016) Interactive algorithms for improving incomplete linguistic preference relations based on consistency measures. Appl Soft Comput 42:66–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Xia MM, Xu ZS, Wang Z (2014) Multiplicative consistency-based decision support system for incomplete linguistic preference relations. Int J Syst Sci 45(3):625–636

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Liao HC, Xu ZS, Xia MM (2014) Multiplicative consistency of hesitant fuzzy preference relation and its application in group decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Making 13(01):47–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang ZM, Wu C (2014) On the use of multiplicative consistency in hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Knowl Based Syst 72:13–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Genç S, Boran FE, Akay D, Xu ZS (2010) Interval multiplicative transitivity for consistency, missing values and priority weights of interval fuzzy preference relations. Inf Sci 180(24):4877–4891

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu J, Chiclana F (2014) Multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic reciprocal preference relations and its application to missing values estimation and consensus building. Knowl Based Syst 71:187–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Xu ZS, Cai XQ, Szmidt E (2011) Algorithms for estimating missing elements of incomplete intuitionistic preference relations. Int J Intell Syst 26(9):787–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. de Mantaras RL (2001) Case-based reasoning, machine learning and its application. Springer, Berlin, pp 127–145

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Aamodt E, Plaza (1994) Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Commun 7:39–59

    Google Scholar 

  30. Liao TW, Zhang Z, Mount CR (1998) Similarity measures for retrieval in case-based reasoning systems. Appl Artif Intell 12(4):267–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Finnie G, Sun Z (2002) Similarity and metrics in case-based reasoning. Int J Intell Syst 17(3):273–287

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Liao HC, Xu ZS, Zeng XJ (2014) Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making. Inf Sci 271:125–142

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Orlovsky SA (1978) Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1:155–167

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Tanino T (1984) Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 33(84):117–131

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Herrera VE, Chiclana F, Herrera F, Alonso S (2007) Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 37:176–189

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E, Alonso S, Herrera F (2009) Cardinal consistency of reciprocal preference relations: a characterization of multiplicative transitivity. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 17:14–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang TC, Chen YH (2008) Applying fuzzy linguistic preference relations to the improvement of consistency of fuzzy AHP. Inf Sci 178(19):3755–3765

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Dong YC, Xu YF, Li HY (2008) On consistency measures of linguistic preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 189(2):430–444

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhang GQ, Dong YC, Xu YF (2014) Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments. Inf Fusion 17:46–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yu L, Lai KK (2011) A distance-based group decision-making methodology for multi-person multi-criteria emergency decision support. Decis Supp Syst 51(2):307–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Körte J (2003) Risk-based emergency decision support. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 82(3):235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Levy JK, Taji K (2007) Group decision support for hazards planning and emergency management: a Group Analytic Network Process (GANP) approach. Math Comput Model 46(7):906–917

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang Y (2014) Risk decision analysis in emergency response: a method based on cumulative prospect theory. Comput Oper Res 42:75–82

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71571123, 71532007, 71771155), and the Major Program of the National Social Science Fund of China (Grant No. 17ZDA092).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Disaster Management and Reconstruction, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610207, China

    Jie Gao

  2. School of Economics and Management, Sichuan Tourism University, Chengdu, 610100, China

    Jie Gao

  3. Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, China

    Zeshui Xu, Peijia Ren & Huchang Liao

  4. School of Computer and Software, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing, 210044, Jiangsu, China

    Zeshui Xu

Authors
  1. Jie Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zeshui Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peijia Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huchang Liao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeshui Xu.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gao, J., Xu, Z., Ren, P. et al. An emergency decision making method based on the multiplicative consistency of probabilistic linguistic preference relations. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 10, 1613–1629 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-018-0839-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-018-0839-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation