Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Additive consistent triangular fuzzy preference relation and likelihood comparison algorithm based group decision making

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper investigates the likelihood comparison algorithm of triangular fuzzy numbers (TFNs) and the additive consistency of triangular fuzzy preference relation (TFPR) for group decision making (GDM). According to the likelihood of intervals, the likelihood of TFNs is defined to design a likelihood comparison algorithm for ranking TFNs. The additive consistency of TFPR is defined based on the additive consistency of fuzzy preference relation. Then considering the risk attitude of the decision maker (DM), the linear programming models are constructed to derive the corresponding priority weights from the TFPR in the optimistic, pessimistic, and neutral cases, respectively. Using a linear programming model, the derived priority weights are integrated to the normalized triangular fuzzy priority weights (TFPWs). In GDM, DMs' weights are determined by the deviation degrees and dispersion degrees of DMs. Aggregating all the individual TFPRs, the collective TFPR is obtained. The normalized TFPWs are determined from the collective TFPR. The ranking order of alternatives is generated by the designed likelihood comparison algorithm. Therefore, a new method is proposed to solve GDM with TFPRs. Finally, the effectiveness and advantage of the proposed method are illustrated by some examples.

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

Algorithm 1:

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. 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 

  3. Wang YM, Luo Y, Hua Z (2008) On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications. Eur J Oper Res 186(2):735–747

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Xu ZS (2004) On priority method of triangular fuzzy number complementary judgement matrix. J Syst Eng 1:85–88

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Gong Z, Liu S (2006) Consistency and priority of triangular fuzzy number complementary judgment matrix. Control Decis 21(8):903–907

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Liu F, Zhang WG, Zhang LH (2014) Consistency analysis of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 235(3):718–726

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang ZJ (2015) Consistency analysis and priority derivation of triangular fuzzy preference relations based on modal value and geometric mean. Inf Sci 314:169–183

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Dong M, Li S, Zhang H (2015) Approaches to group decision making with incomplete information based on power geometric operators and triangular fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst Appl 42(21):7846–7857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang ZJ, Tong X (2016) Consistency analysis and group decision making based on triangular fuzzy additive reciprocal preference relations. Inf Sci 361:29–47

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu F, Pedrycz W, Wang ZX, Zhang WG (2017) An axiomatic approach to approximation-consistency of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 322:1–18

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang ZJ, Lin J (2017) Acceptability measurement and priority weight elicitation of triangular fuzzy multiplicative preference relations based on geometric consistency and uncertainty indices. Inf Sci 402:105–123

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Meng F, Lin J, Tan C, Zhang Q (2017) A new multiplicative consistency based method for decision making with triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 315:1–25

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Meng F, Chen X (2017) A new method for triangular fuzzy compare wise judgment matrix process based on consistency analysis. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19(1):27–46

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu F, Liu ZL, Wu YH (2018) A group decision making model based on triangular fuzzy additive reciprocal matrices with additive approximation-consistency. Appl Soft Comput 65:349–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang ZJ (2019) A goal-programming-based heuristic approach to deriving fuzzy weights in analytic form from triangular fuzzy preference relations. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 27(2):234–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang ZJ, Lin J (2020) And-like-uninorm based consistency analysis and optimized fuzzy weight closed-form solution of triangular fuzzy additive preference relations. Inf Sci 516:429–452

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang F (2021) Geometric consistency of triangular fuzzy multiplicative preference relation and its application to group decision making. Knowl Inf Syst 63:21–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Xu ZS (2002) A method for priorities of triangular fuzzy number complementary judgment matrices. Fuzzy Syst Math 16(1):47–50

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Wu J, Chiclana F (2014) Visual information feedback mechanism and attitudinal prioritisation method for group decision making with triangular fuzzy complementary preference relations. Inf Sci 279:716–734

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Wan S, Cheng X, Chen C, Dong J (2021) L-R geometric consistency definition of triangular multiplicative preference relation in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 409:85–113

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang ZJ (2021) A novel triangular fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 29(7):2032–2046

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang ZJ (2021) Eigenproblem driven triangular fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Inf Sci 578:795–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Yang W, Jhang ST, Shi SG, Xu ZS, Ma ZM (2020) A novel additive consistency for intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations in group decision making. Appl Intell 50:4342–4356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jin F, Zhang Y, Garg H, Liu J, Chen J (2022) Evaluation of small and medium-sized enterprises’ sustainable development with hesitant fuzzy linguistic group decision-making method. Appl Intell 52:4940–4960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Orlovsky SA (1978) Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1(3):155–167

  26. Tanino T (1984) Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 12(2):117–131

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Xu ZS (2002) Two methods for priorities of complementary judgment matrices-weighted least-square method and eigenvector method. Syst Eng Theory Pract 22(7):71–75

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Laarhoven PJ, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1-3):229–241

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Yager RR (2004) OWA aggregation over a continuous interval argument with applications to decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybernetics) 34(5):1952–1963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wan SP, Wang F, Dong JY (2016) A novel risk attitudinal ranking method for intuitionistic fuzzy values and application to MADM. Appl Soft Comput 40:98–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114(1):1–9

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang YM, Elhag TM, Hua Z (2006) A modified fuzzy logarithmic least squares method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(23):3055–3071

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Xu ZS, Da QL (2003) A likelihood-based method for priorities of interval judgment matrices. Chin J Manag Sci 11(1):63–65

    Google Scholar 

  34. Alizadeh R, Allen JK, Mistree F (2020) Managing computational complexity using surrogate models: a critical review. Res Eng Des 31:275–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Alizadeh R, Jia L, Nellippallil AB, Wang G, Hao J, Allen JK, Mistree F (2019) Ensemble of surrogates and cross-validation for rapid and accurate predictions using small data sets. Arti Intell Eng Design Anal Manuf 33(4):484–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Naz M, Shabir M (2014) On fuzzy bipolar soft sets, their algebraic structures and applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:1645–1656

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Aurang Z, Asghar K, Muhammad F, Muhammad I (2022) Aggregation operators of Pythagorean fuzzy bi-polar soft sets with application in multiple attribute decision making. Granul Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41066-021-00307-w

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 62141302 and 11861034), MOE (Ministry of Education in China) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (Nos. 20YJC630139 and 20YJA630059), and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province of China (No.20212BAB201011), Guangzhou Philosophy and Social Sciences Planning 2021 Project (No. 2021GZGJ49), and Funding by Science and Technology Projects in Guangzhou (No.202201011432). We wish to express our appreciation to the research participants of this study.

Data availability statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business Administration, Guangdong University of Finance & Economics, 21 Luntou Road, Guangzhou, 510320, China

    Feng Wang

  2. School of Information Management, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, 168 East Shuanggang Road, Nanchang, 330013, China

    Shuping Wan

Authors
  1. Feng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuping Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, F., Wan, S. Additive consistent triangular fuzzy preference relation and likelihood comparison algorithm based group decision making. Appl Intell 53, 12098–12113 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-04024-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-04024-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation