Advertisement

A New Selection Process Based on Granular Computing for Group Decision Making Problems

  • Francisco Javier Cabrerizo
  • Raquel Ureña
  • Juan Antonio Morente-Molinera
  • Witold Pedrycz
  • Francisco Chiclana
  • Enrique Herrera-Viedma
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 513)

Abstract

In Group Decision Making, there are situations in which the decision makers may not be able to provide his/her opinions properly and they could contain contradictions. To avoid it, in this contribution, we present a new selection process to deal with inconsistent information. As part of it, we use a method based on granular computing to increase the consistency of the opinions given by the decision makers. To do so, each opinion is articulated as a certain information granule instead of a single numeric value, offering the necessary flexibility to increase the consistency. Finally, the importance of the decision makers’ opinions in the aggregation step is modeled by means of their consistency.

Keywords

Group decision making Selection process Granular computing Consistency Aggregation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge FEDER financial support from the Projects FUZZYLING-II Project TIN2010-17876 and TIN2013-40658-P, and also the financial support from the Andalusian Excellence Projects TIC-05299 and TIC-5991.

References

  1. 1.
    Tanino, T.: Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 12(12), 117–131 (1984)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Meng, F., Chen, X.: A new method for group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations. Knowledge-Based Syst. 73, 111–123 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pedrycz, W.: Granular Computing: Analysis and Design of Intelligent Systems. CRC Press/Francis Taylor, Boca Raton (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fodor, J., Roubens, M.: Fuzzy Preference Modelling and Multicriteria Decision Support. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herrera-Viedma, E., Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Alonso, S.: Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B Cybern. 37(1), 176–189 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, S.-M., Lin, T.-E., Lee, L.-W.: Group decision making using incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on the additive consistency and the order consistency. Inf. Sci. 259, 1–15 (2014)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F., Luque, M.: Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 154(1), 98–109 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saaty, T.L.: Fundamental of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the AHP. RWS Publications, Pittsburg (1994)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kennedy, J., Eberhart, R.C.: Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, pp. 1942–1948 (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, Y., Jiao, L., Shang, R., Stolkin, R.: Dynamic-context cooperative quantum-behaved particle swarm optimization based on multilevel thresholding applied to medical image segmentation. Inf. Sci. 294, 408–422 (2015)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mesiar, R., Špirková, J., Vavríková, L.: Weighted aggregation operators based on minimization. Inf. Sci. 178(4), 1133–1140 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Špirková, J.: Weighted operators based on dissimilarity function. Inf. Sci. 281, 172–181 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yager, R.R., Filev, D.P.: Induced ordered weighted averaging operators. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B Cybern. 29(2), 141–150 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yager, R.R.: On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 18(1), 183–190 (1988)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zadeh, L.A.: A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages. Comput. Math. Appl. 9(1), 149–184 (1983)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yager, R.R.: Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 11(1), 49–73 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Verdegay, J.L.: A sequential selection process in group decision making with a linguistic assessment approach. Inf. Sci. 85(4), 223–239 (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Javier Cabrerizo
    • 1
  • Raquel Ureña
    • 2
  • Juan Antonio Morente-Molinera
    • 2
  • Witold Pedrycz
    • 3
  • Francisco Chiclana
    • 4
  • Enrique Herrera-Viedma
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Software Engineering and Computer SystemsUniversidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)MadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and Artificial IntelligenceUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  4. 4.School of Computer Science and InformaticsDe Montfort UniversityLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations