In this paper, some new operational laws of intuitionistic multiplicative numbers (IMNs) are defined, which can guarantee the closedness of operation. Based on these operational laws, some aggregation operators are proposed, including intuitionistic multiplicative weighted averaging (IMWA) operator and intuitionistic multiplicative weighted geometric (IMWG) operator. These aggregation operators also have the closedness under presented operational laws. Then, desirable properties of aggregation operators are also expatiated in details. Finally, a group decision making method is presented based on ituitionistic multiplicative preference relation, and the solution process of this decision making method is shown in details through a numerical example.
DimitrovD., The Paretian liberal with intuitionistic fuzzy preferences: A result, Social Choice and Welfare23 (2004), 149–156.
2.
ErguD., KouG., PengY. and ShiY., A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP, European Journal of Operational Research213 (2011), 246–259.
3.
CondeE. and PĺęrezM.P.R., A linear optimization problem to derive relative weights using an interval judgment matrix, European Journal of Operational Research201 (2010), 537–544.
4.
Herrera-ViedmaE., HerreraF., ChiclanaF. and LuqueM., Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations, European Journal of Operational Research154 (2004), 98–109.
5.
SzmidtE. and KacprzykJ., A consensus-reaching process under intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations, International Journal of Intelligent Systems18 (2003), 837–852.
6.
ChielanaF., Herrera-ViedmaE., AlonsoS. and HerreraF., Cardinal consistency of reciprocal preference relation: A characterization of multiplicative transitivity, IEEE Transaction on Fuzzy Systems17 (2009), 14–23.
7.
LiuF., Acceptable consistency analysis of interval reciprocal comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems160 (2009), 2686–2700.
8.
LiuF., Acceptable consistency analysis of interval reciprocal comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems160 (2009), 2686–2700.
9.
LeeH.S. and TsengW.K., Goal Programming methods for constructing additive consistency fuzzy preference relations, Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems4252 (2006), 910–916.
10.
MaJ., FanZ.P., JiangY.P., MaoJ.Y. and MaL., A method for repairing the inconsistency of reciprocal relations, Fuzzy Sets and Systems157 (2006), 20–33.
11.
AtanassovK., Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems20 (1986), 87–96.
12.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8 (1965), 338–353.
13.
XiaM.M., XuZ.S. and LiaoH.C., Preference relations based on intuitionistic multiplicative information, IEEE Transaction on Fuzzy Systems21 (2013), 113–132.
14.
XiaM.M. and XuZ.S., Group decision making based on intuitionistic multiplicative aggregation operators, Applied Mathematical Modeling37 (2013), 5120–5133.
15.
OrlovskyS.A., Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation, Fuzzy Sets and Systems1 (1978), 155–167.
16.
AlonsoS., Herrera-ViedmaE., ChiclanaF. and HerreraF., A web based consensus support system for group decision making problems and incomplete preferences, Information Sciences180 (2010), 4477–4495.
17.
GencS., BoranF.E., AkayD. and XuZ.S., Interval multiplicative transitivity for consistency missing values and priority weights of interval reciprocal relations, Information Sciences180 (2010), 4877–4891.
18.
SaatyT.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, Mcgraw Hill, 1980.
19.
PedryczW. and SongM.L., Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in group decision making and its optimization with an allocation of information granularity, IEEE Transaction on Fuzzy Systems19 (2011), 527–539.
20.
DongY.C., XuY.F., LiH.Y. and FengB., The OWA-based consensus operator under linguistic representation models using position indexes, European Journal of Operational Research203 (2010), 455–463.
21.
DongY.C., ZhangG.Q., HongW.C. and XuY.F., Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method, Decision Support Systems49 (2010), 281–289.
22.
WangY.M., YangJ.B. and XuD.L., A preference aggregtion method though the estimation of utility intervals, Computer and Operations Research32 (2005), 2020–2049.
23.
WangY.M. and ElhagT.M.S., A chi-square method for obtaining a priority vector from multiplicative and reciprocal relations, European Journal of Operational Research182 (2007), 356–366.
24.
WangY.M., FanZ.P. and HuaZ.H., A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix, European Journal of Operational Research177 (2007), 458–471.
25.
FanZ.P., MaJ., JiangY.P., SunY.H. and MaL., A goal programming approach to group decision making based on multiplicative preference relations and fuzzy preference relations, European Journal of Operational Research174 (2006), 311–321.
26.
XuZ.S., Goal programming models for obtaining the priority vector of incomplete fuzzy preference relation, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning36 (2004), 261–270.
27.
XuZ.S. and CaiX.Q., Group consensus algorithms based on preference relations, Information Sciences181 (2011), 150–162.
28.
XuZ.S., A practical method for priority of interval number complementary judgment matrix, Operations Research and Management Science10 (2002), 16–19.
29.
XuZ.S., On compatibility of interval fuzzy preference matrices, Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making3 (2004), 217–225.
30.
XuZ.S. and ChenJ., Some models for deriving the priority weights from interval reciprocal relations, European Journal of Operational Research184 (2008), 266–280.
31.
XuZ.S., Ituitionistic preference relations and their application in group decision making, Information Sciences177 (2007), 2363–2379.
32.
GongZ.W., LiL.S., ForrestJ. and ZhaoY., The optimal priority models of the intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation and their application in selecting industries with high meteorological sensitivity, Expert Systems with Applications38 (2011), 4394–4402.
