Advertisement

General Preference Structure with Uncertainty Data Present by Interval-Valued Fuzzy Relation and Used in Decision Making Model

  • Barbara PȩkalaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 643)

Abstract

Interval-valued fuzzy relations can be interpreted as a tool that may help to model in a better way imperfect information, especially under imperfectly defined facts and imprecise knowledge. Preference structures are of great interest nowadays because of their applications. From a weak preference relation derive the following relations: strict preference, indifference and incomparability, which by aggregations and negations are created and examined in this paper. Moreover, we propose the algorithm of decision making by using new preference structure.

Keywords

Interval-valued fuzzy relations Preference relations Reciprocity property 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was partially supported by the Centre for Innovation and Transfer of Natural Sciences and Engineering Knowledge of University of Rzeszów, Poland, project RPPK.01.03.00-18-001/10.

References

  1. 1.
    Aczél, J.: Lectures on Functional Equations and their Applications. Academic Press, New York, London (1966)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barrenechea, E., Fernandez, J., Pagola, M., Chiclana, F., Bustince, H.: Construction of interval-valued fuzzy preference relations from ignorance functions and fuzzy preference relations: application to decision making. Knowl. Based Syst. 58, 33–44 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bustince, H., Fernandez, J., Kolesárová, A., Mesiar, R.: Generation of linear orders for intervals by means of aggregation functions. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 220, 69–77 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bentkowska, U., Pȩkala, B., Bustince, H., Fernandez, J., Jurio, A., Balicki, K.: N-reciprocity property for interval-valued fuzzy relations with an application to group decision making problems in social networks. Inte. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. (submitted)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bustince, H., Pagola, M., Mesiar, R., Hüllermeier, E., Herrera, F.: Grouping, overlap, and generalized bientropic functions for fuzzy modeling of pairwise comparisons. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 20(3), 405–415 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Birkhoff, G.: Lattice Theory. AMS Coll. Publ. 25, Providence (1967)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Calvo, T., Kolesárová, A., Komorniková, M., Mesiar, R.: Aggregation operators: properties, classes and construction methods. In: Calvo, T., et al. (eds.) Aggregation Operators, pp. 3–104. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, H., Zhou, L.: An approach to group decision making with interval fuzzy preference relations based on induced generalized continuous ordered weighted averaging operator. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 13432–13440 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., Pereira, R.A.M.: Preferences and consistency issues in group decision making. In: Bustince, H., et al. (eds.) Fuzzy Sets and Their Extensions: Representation, Aggregation and Models, pp. 219–237. Springer, Berlin (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E.: Integrating three representation models in fuzzy multipurpose decision making based on fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 97(1), 33–48 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Baets, B., Van de Walle, B., Kerre, E.: Fuzzy preference structures without incomparability. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 76(3), 333–348 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deschrijver, G., Cornelis, C., Kerre, E.E.: On the representation of intuitonistic fuzzy t-Norms and t-Conorms. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 12, 45–61 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deschrijver, G., Kerre, E.: Aggregation operators in interval-valued fuzzy and atanassov intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. In: Bustince, H., et al. (eds.) Fuzzy Sets and their Extensions: Representation, Aggregation and Models, pp. 183–203. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Deschrijver, G.: Quasi-arithmetic means and OWA functions in interval-valued and Atanassovs intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. In: Galichet, S., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of EUSFLAT-LFA 2011, July 18–22, 2011, pp. 506–513. Aix-les-Bains, France (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Drygaś, P., Pȩkala, B.: Properties of decomposable operations on some extension of the fuzzy set theory. In: Atanassov, K.T., Hryniewicz, O., Kacprzyk, J., et al. (eds.) Advances in Fuzzy Sets, Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, Generalized Nets and Related Topics, pp. 105–118. EXIT, Warsaw (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fodor, J., Roubens, M.: Fuzzy Preference Modelling and Multicriteria Decision Support in Theory and Decision Library. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Freson, S., De Baets, B., De Meyer, H.: Closing reciprocal relations w.r.t. stochastic transitivity. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 241, 2–26 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gorzałczany, M.B.: A method of inference in approximate reasoning based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 21(1), 1–17 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klement, E.P., Mesiar, R., Pap, E.: Triangular Norms. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Komorníková, M., Mesiar, R.: Aggregation functions on bounded partially ordered sets and their classification. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 175, 48–56 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu, F., Zhang, W.-G., Zhang, L.-H.: A group decision making model based on a generalized ordered weighted geometric average operator with interval preference matrices. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 246, 1–18 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Llamazares, B.D., Baets, B.: Fuzzy strict preference relations compatible with fuzzy orderings. Int. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. 18(1), 13–24 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ovchinnikov, S.V., Roubens, M.: On strict preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 43, 319–326 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Paternain, D., Jurio, A., Barrenechea, E., Bustince, H., Bedregal, B., Szmidt, E.: An alternative to fuzzy methods in decision-making problems. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(9), 7729–7735 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pȩkala, B., Bentkowska, U.: Generalized reciprocity property for interval-valued fuzzy setting in some aspect of social network. In: IWIFSGN 2016 Fifteenth International Workshop on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Generalized Nets, Warsaw, Poland, October 12–14 (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pradera, A., Beliakov, G., Bustince, H., De Baets, B.: A review of the relationships between implication, negation and aggregation functions from the point of view of material implication. Inf. Sci. 329, 357–380 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Roubens, M., Vincke, P.: Preference Modelling. Springer, Berlin (1985)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sambuc, R.: Fonctions \(\phi \)-floues: Application á l’aide au diagnostic en pathologie thyroidienne. Ph.D. Thesis, Universit\(\acute{e}\) de Marseille, France (1975) (in French)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sanz, J., Fernandez, A., Bustince, H., Herrera, F.: Improving the performance of fuzzy rule-based classification systems with interval-valued fuzzy sets and genetic amplitude tuning. Inf. Sci. 180(19), 3674–3685 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sanz, J., Fernandez, A., Bustince, H., Herrera, F.: A genetic tuning to improve the performance of fuzzy rule-based classification systems with intervalvalued fuzzy sets: degree of ignorance and lateral position. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 52(6), 751–766 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Türksen, I.B., Bilgiç, T.: Interval-valued strict preference relations with Zadeh triples. Fuzzy Sets. Syst. 78, 183–195 (1996)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Xu, Z.: On compatibility of interval fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 3, 217–225 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xu, G.-L., Liu, F.: An approach to group decision making based on interval multiplicative and fuzzy preference relations by using projection. Appl. Math. Model. 37, 3929–3943 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zadeh, L.A.: The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Inf. Sci. 8, 199–249 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Interdisciplinary Centre for Computational ModellingUniversity of RzeszówRzeszówPoland

Personalised recommendations