Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information
Introduction
The increasing complexity of the social–economic environment nowadays has caused that the decision-making processes are being widely studied [15], [18]. Many organizations have moved from a single decision maker or expert to a group of experts to accomplish this task successfully. A group decision making (GDM) problem is usually understood as a decision problem which consists in finding the best alternative(s) from a set of feasible alternatives, , according to the preferences provided by a group of experts, , characterized by their experience and knowledge. To do this, experts have to express their preferences by means of a set of evaluations over the set of alternatives.
In this paper, we assume that experts use preference relations [8], [31], [47], [48], amongst other reasons, because they are a useful tool in the aggregation of experts preferences into group preference [8], [9], [10], [31], [32], [35], [45], [48] and focuses exclusively on two alternatives at a time, which facilitates experts when expressing their preferences. However, this way of providing preferences limits experts in their global perception of the alternatives and, as a consequence, the provided preferences could be not rational. Usually, rationality is related to consistency, which is associated with the transitivity property. Many properties have been suggested to model transitivity of a fuzzy preference relation [32]. One of these properties is the additive consistency, which, as shown in [32], can be seen as the parallel concept of Saaty’s consistency property in the case of multiplicative preference relations [47]. Obviously, the consistent information, i.e., information which does not imply any kind of contradiction, is more relevant or important than information containing some contradictions. Thus, it would be of great importance to measure the level of consistency of each expert in the GDM problem.
In these problems, a difficulty that has to be addressed is the lack of information. As aforementioned, each expert has his/her own experience concerning the problem being studied, which also may imply a major drawback, that of an expert not having a perfect knowledge of the problem to be solved. Indeed, there may be cases where an expert would not be able to efficiently express any kind of preference degree between two or more of the available options. This may be due to an expert not possessing a precise or sufficient level of knowledge of part of the problem, or because that expert is unable to discriminate the degree to which some options are better than others. Experts in these situations would rather not guess those preference degrees and, as a consequence, they might provide incomplete information [1], [2], [4], [29], [30], [38], [39], [45], [49], [50]. Therefore, it would be of great importance to provide the experts with tools that allow them to express this lack of knowledge in their opinions.
Another important issue to bear in mind is the different types of information used by the experts to provide their opinions. Usually, many problems present quantitative aspects which can be assessed by means of precise numerical values [8], [30], [29], [37]. However, some problems present also qualitative aspects that are complex to assess by means of precise and exact values. In these cases, the fuzzy linguistic approach [19], [23], [34], [41], [49], [50], [55], [56], [57] can be used to obtain a better solution. This is the case, for instance, when experts try to evaluate the “comfort” of a car, where linguistic terms like “good”, “fair”, “poor” are used [40]. Many of these problems use linguistic variables assessed in linguistic term sets whose terms are uniformly and symmetrically distributed, i.e., assuming the same discrimination levels on both sides of mid linguistic term. However, there exist problems that need to assess their variables with linguistic term sets that are not uniformly and symmetrically distributed [21], [33]. This type of linguistic term sets are called unbalanced linguistic term sets (see Fig. 1).
To solve GDM problems, the experts are faced by applying two processes before obtaining a final solution [22], [25], [31], [36], [37]: the consensus process and the selection process (see Fig. 2). The former consists in obtaining the maximum degree of consensus or agreement between the set of experts on the solution set of alternatives. Normally, the consensus process is guided by a human figure called moderator [7], [22], [25], [36], who is a person that does not participate in the discussion but monitors the agreement in each moment of the consensus process and is in charge of supervising and addressing the consensus process toward success, i.e., to achieve the maximum possible agreement and to reduce the number of experts outside of the consensus in each new consensus round. The latter refers to obtaining the solution set of alternatives from the opinions on the alternatives given by the experts. It involves two different steps [26], [46]: aggregation of individual opinions and exploitation of the collective opinion. Clearly, it is preferable that the set of experts achieves a great agreement amongst their opinions before applying the selection process and, therefore, in this paper we focus on the consensus process.
A consensus process is defined as a dynamic and iterative group discussion process, coordinated by a moderator helping experts bring their opinions closer. If the consensus level is lower than a specified threshold, the moderator would urge experts to discuss their opinions further in an effort to bring them closer. On the contrary, when the consensus level is higher than the threshold, the moderator would apply the selection process in order to obtain the final consensus solution to the GDM problem. In this framework, an important question is how to substitute the actions of the moderator in the group discussion process in order to automatically model the whole consensus process. Some automatic consensus approaches have been proposed in [6], [29], [31], [34], [42]. Most of these consensus models use only consensus measures to control and guide the consensus process. However, if a consensus process is seen as a type of persuasion model [16], other criteria could be used to guide consensus reaching processes as, for example, the cooperation or consistency criterion. Some fuzzy consensus approaches based on both consistency and consensus measures can be found in [14], [17], [24], [29].
The aim of this paper is to present a consensus model to deal with GDM problems in which experts use incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relations to provide their preferences. This consensus model will not only be based on consensus measures but also on consistency measures. We use two kinds of consensus measures to guide the consensus reaching process, consensus degrees, which evaluate the agreement of all the experts, and proximity measures, which evaluate the agreement between the experts’ individual opinions and the group opinion. To compute them, first, all missing values are estimated using a consistency-based estimation procedure. This estimation procedure is based on the Tanino’s consistency principle and makes use of all the estimation possibilities that derive from it. In this approach, the computation of missing values in an expert’s incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relation is done using only the preference values provided by that particular expert. By doing this, it is assured that the reconstruction of the incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relation is compatible with the rest of the information provided by that expert. Also, the main aim in the design of these approaches is to maintain or maximise the expert’s global consistency, as it has been shown in [11]. Afterwards, some consistency measures for each expert are computed. Both consistency and consensus measures are used to design a feedback mechanism, and, in such a way, we substitute the actions of the moderator and give advice to the experts on how they should change and complete their opinions to obtain a solution with a high consensus degree (making experts’ opinions closer).
The rest of the paper is set out as follows. Section 2 deals with the preliminaries necessary to develop our consensus model. In Section 3, the consensus model for GDM problems with incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information is presented. Section 4 shows a practical example to illustrate the application of the consensus model. Finally, some concluding remarks are pointed out in Section 5.
Section snippets
Preliminaries
In this section, we briefly present the tools necessary to design the consensus model, that is, the methodology used to manage unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information, the concept of incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relation, consistency measures and the consistency based procedure to estimate missing values.
A consensus approach to model GDM problems with incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relations
In this section, we present a consensus model for GDM problems where experts provide their preferences using incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relations. To solve GDM problems with this kind of preference relations, firstly, it is necessary to deal with the missing values [4], [29], [30], [38], [39]. The previous consistency based procedure of missing values allows us to measure the consistency levels of each expert. This consistency information is used in this section to
Example of application
An investment company wants to invest a sum of money in the best industrial sector, from the set of four possible alternatives:
- •
Car industry: .
- •
Food company: .
- •
Computer company: .
- •
Arms industry: .
To do this, four consultancy departments within the company are requested to provide information:
- •
Risk analysis department: .
- •
Growth analysis department: .
- •
Social–political analysis department: .
- •
Environmental impact analysis department: .
Each department is directed by an expert who provides
Concluding remarks
In this paper, we have presented a model of consensus for GDM problems with incomplete unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information. It uses two different kinds of measures to guide the consensus reaching process, consistency and consensus measures, and applies a feedback mechanism to give personalized advice to the experts on how to change and complete their unbalanced fuzzy linguistic preference relations. As a consequence, this model allows us to achieve consistent and consensus solutions. In
Acknowledgments
This paper has been developed with the financing of andalucian excellence project TIC05299, PETRI project (PET2007-0460) and FUZZYLING project (TIN2007-61079).
References (59)
Interval-valued preference structures
European Journal of Operational Research
(1998)- et al.
Integrating three representation models in fuzzy multipurpose decision making based on fuzzy preference relations
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(1998) - et al.
A note on the internal consistency of various preference representations
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(2002) - et al.
Some induced ordered weighted averaging operators and their use for solving group decision-making problems based on fuzzy preference relations
European Journal of Operational Research
(2007) - et al.
Linguistic decision analysis: steps for solving decisions problems under linguistic information
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(2000) - et al.
Multiperson decision making based on multiplicative preference relations
European Journal of Operational Research
(2001) - et al.
A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(1996) - et al.
Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic owa operators
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(1996) - et al.
A rational consensus model in group decision making using linguistic assessments
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
(1997) - et al.
Linguistic measures based on fuzzy coincidence for reaching consensus in group decision making
International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
(1997)
Choice processes for non-homogeneous group decision making in linguistic setting
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations
European Journal of Operational Research
Group decision making with a fuzzy linguistic majority
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information
European Journal of Operational Research
An interactive procedure for multiple attribute group decision making with incomplete information: range-based approach
European Journal of Operational Research
A fuzzy-set approach to treat determinacy and consistency of linguistic terms in multi-criteria decision making
International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
Dealing with incomplete information in a fuzzy linguistic recommender system to disseminate information in university digital libraries
Knowledge-Based Systems
Fuzzy sets and decision analysis
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
A method for multiple attribute decision making with incomplete weight information in linguistic setting
Knowledge-Based Systems
Induced aggregation operators
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part I
Information Sciences
The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part II
Information Sciences
The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part III
Information Sciences
A computational approach to fuzzy quantifiers in natural languages
Computers and Mathematics with Applications
Type-1 OWA operators for aggregating uncertain information with uncertain weights induced by type-2 linguistic quantifiers
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
A consistency-based procedure to estimate missing pairwise preference values
International Journal of Intelligent Systems
An interactive decision support system based on consistency criteria
Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing
Cited by (297)
Integrating incomplete preference estimation and consistency control in consensus reaching
2024, Information FusionA design methodology based on two dimensional fuzzy linguistic variables for attribute control charts with real case applications
2023, Engineering Applications of Artificial IntelligenceAverage consistency index based consensus model for a group decision making problem dealing with ELICIT expressions
2023, Computers and Industrial EngineeringUsing scoring functions in a group decision-making procedure with heterogeneous experts and qualitative assessments
2023, International Journal of Approximate ReasoningA survey of consensus in group decision making under the CWW environment
2023, Applied Soft Computing