Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach on Pairwise Comparison Tables to Decision Involving Multiple Decision Makers

  • Salvatore Greco
  • Benedetto Matarazzo
  • Roman Słowiński
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6954)

Abstract

In this paper, we present a rough set approach to pairwise comparison tables for supporting decisions of multiple decision makers. More precisely, we deal with preference learning from pairwise comparisons, in case of multiple decision makers. Comparing to classical rough set approach, there are three main differences that are the following: we are learning a preference relation, so we have to work with a pairwise comparison table, while the classical rough set approach considers a classification table; we are taking into account a preference order in data, so we have to use the Dominance-based Rough Set Approach (DRSA), while the classical rough set approach based on equivalence relation does not consider such an order; we are taking into account multiple decision makers, while the classical rough set approach considers mostly a single classification decision provided by one decision maker only.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowiński, R.: Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 129(1), 1–47 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowiński, R.: Decision rule approach. In: Figueira, J., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the art Surveys, ch. 13, pp. 507–561. Springer, Berlin (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowiński, R.: Dominance-based rough set approach to decision involving multiple decision makers. In: Greco, S., Hata, Y., Hirano, S., Inuiguchi, M., Miyamoto, S., Nguyen, H.S., Słowiński, R. (eds.) RSCTC 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4259, pp. 306–317. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Inuiguchi, M., Miyajima, T.: Rough set based rule induction from two decision tables. European Journal of Operational Research 181(3), 1540–1553 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jelassi, T., Kersten, G.E., Zionts, S.: An introduction to group decision and negotiation support. In: Bana e Costa, C. (ed.) Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, pp. 537–568. Springer, Heidelberg (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nurmi, H., Kacprzyk, J., Fedrizzi, M.: Probabilistic, fuzzy and rough concepts in social choice. European Journal of Operational Research 95(2), 264–277 (1996)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pawlak, Z.: Rough Sets. Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1990)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Słowiński, R., Greco, S., Matarazzo, B.: Rough set based decision support. In: Search Methodologies: Introductory Tutorials in Optimization and Decision Support Techniques, pp. 475–527. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Słowiński, R., Greco, S., Matarazzo, B.: Rough Sets in Decision Making. In: Meyers, R.A. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, pp. 7753–7786. Springer, New York (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Salvatore Greco
    • 1
  • Benedetto Matarazzo
    • 1
  • Roman Słowiński
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of EconomicsUniversity of CataniaCataniaItaly
  2. 2.Institute of Computing SciencePoznań University of TechnologyPoznańPoland
  3. 3.Systems Research InstitutePolish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations