Three-way decisions, deduced from decision-theoretic rough set (DTRS), provide useful approaches for uncertain decision-making problems from a new perspective. Considering situations where decision-makers hesitate among several evaluation values, the hesitant fuzzy set, an innovative extension of fuzzy set, is introduced into multigranulation DTRS under multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) environment. More specifically, we incorporate DTRS with hesitant fuzzy information into MCGDM in this paper, and explore the related decision-making mechanism. Firstly, the variable precision multigranulation hesitant fuzzy DTRS over two universes is defined by utilizing hesitant relation and conditional probability of a hesitant fuzzy event, and the associated decision rules and properties are derived and carefully investigated. Accordingly, as two special types, optimistic and pessimistic multigranulation hesitant fuzzy DTRS over two universes are constructed similarly at the same time. Then, different from loss functions with fixed values in most of the existing DTRS models, the loss functions in the paper are not given directly but calculated from evaluation values expressed by hesitant fuzzy elements. With the aid of the distance measure of hesitant fuzzy elements, the calculation of loss functions is presented. Furthermore, the three-way group decision-making model based on multigranulation hesitant fuzzy DTRS over two universes is established to address MCGDM problems, and key steps of this model are designed. Finally, we elaborate the application of the model by an example of green supplier selection problem.
AzamN., ZhangY., YaoJ.T., Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets, European Journal of Operational Research261(2) (2017), 704–714.
2.
FarhadiniaB., A novel method of ranking hesitant fuzzy values for multiple attribute decision making problems, International Journal of Intelligent Systems28(8) (2013), 752–767.
3.
GongZ.T., ChaiR.L., Covering multigranulation trapezoidal fuzzy decision-theoretic rough fuzzy set models and applications, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems31 (2016), 1621–1633.
4.
HuB.Q., Three-way decisions space and three-way decisions, Information Sciences281(281) (2014), 21–52.
5.
JiaF., LiuP.D., A novel three-way decision model under multiple-criteria environment, Information Science471 (2019), 29–51.
6.
JoshiD., KumarS., Interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy Choquet integral based TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision making, European Journal of Operational Research248 (2016), 183–191.
7.
LiH.X., ZhouX.Z., Risk decision making based on decisiontheoretic rough set: A three-way view decision model, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems4(1) (2011), 1–11.
8.
LiD.Q., ZengW.Y., LiJ.H., New distance and similarity measures on hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications in multiple criteria decision making, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence40 (2015), 11–16.
9.
LiJ., WangJ.Q., An extended qualiflex method under probability hesitant fuzzy environment for selecting green suppliers, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems9(6) (2017), 1866–1879.
10.
LiangD.C., XuZ.S., LiuD., A new aggregation method-based error analysis for decision-theoretic rough sets and its application in hesitant fuzzy information systems, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems25(6) (2017), 1685–1697.
11.
LiuY.T., ZhangH.J., WuY.Z., et al., Ranking range based approach to MADM under incomplete context and its application in venture investment evaluation, Technological and Economic Development of Economy. DOI: 10.3846/tede.2019.10296
12.
ParkJ., ShinK., ChangT.W., et al., An integrative framework for supplier relationship management, Industrial Management and Data Systems110(4) (2010), 495–515.
13.
PawlakZ., Rough sets, International Journal of Cmputer and Information Sciences11(5) (1982), 341–356.
14.
QianY., LiangJ., DangC., Incomplete multigranulation rough set, IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems20 (2010), 420–443.
15.
QianY., LiangJ., YaoY., DangC., MGRS: A multi-granulation rough set, Information Sciences180 (2010), 949–970.
16.
QianY.H., ZhangY.H., SangY.L., et al., Multigranulation decision-theoretic rough sets, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning55(1) (2104), 225–237.
17.
SunB.Z., MaW.M., Multigranulation rough set theory over two universes, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems28(3) (2015), 1251–1269.
18.
SunB.Z., MaW.M., LiB.J., Three-way decisions approach to multiple attribute group decision making with linguistic information-based decision-theoretic rough fuzzy set, International Journal of Approximation Reasoning93 (2018), 424–442.
19.
SunB.Z., MaW.M., QianY.H., Multigranulation fuzzy rough set over two universes and its application to decision making, Knowledge-Based Systems123 (2017), 61–74.
20.
SunB.Z., MaW.M., XiaoX., Three-way group decision making based on multigranulation fuzzy decision-theoretic rough set over two universes, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning81 (2017), 87–102.
21.
SunB.Z., MaW.M., ZhaoH.Y., Decision-theoretic rough fuzzy set model and application, Information Sciences283(5) (2014), 180–196.
22.
TangS.L., Green supplier selection model with hesitant fuzzy information, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems32 (2017), 189–195.
23.
TorraV., Hesitant fuzzy sets, International Journal of Intelligent Systems25(6) (2010), 529–539.
24.
TorraV., NarukawaY., On hesitant fuzzy sets and decision, In: The 18th IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Jeju Island, Korea, 2009, pp. 1378–1382.
25.
WangX.T., TriantaphyllouE., Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods, Omega36 (2008), 45–63.
26.
WuY.Z., LiC.C., ChenX., et al., Group decision making based on linguistic distributions and hesitant assessments: Maximizing the support degree with an accuracy constraint, Information Fusion41 (2018), 151–160.
27.
XiaM., XuZ., Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision making, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning52(3) (2011), 395–407.
28.
XuZ.S., XiaM.M., Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets, Information Science181 (2011), 2128–2138.
29.
YaoY.Y., Three-way decisions with probabilistic rough sets, Information Science180(3) (2010), 341–353.
30.
YY.Y., Probabilistic rough set approximations, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning49(2) (2008), 255–271.
31.
YaoY.Y., Three-way decision: An interpretation of rules in rough set theory, International Conference on Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology, 2009, pp. 642–649.
32.
YaoY.Y., WongS.K.M., A decision theoretic framework for approximating concepts, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies37(6) (1992), 793–809.
33.
YuW.Y., ZhangZ., ZhongQ.Y., et al., Extended TODIM for multi-criteria group decision making based on unbalanced hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets, Computers and Industrial Engineering114 (2017), 316–328.
34.
ZhanJ.M., SunB.Z., AlcantudJ.R., Covering based multi-granulation (I, T)-fuzzy rough set models and applications in multi-attribute group decision-making, Information Sciences476 (2019), 290–318.
35.
ZhangB.W., DongY.C., Herrera-ViedmaE., Group decision making with heterogeneous preference structures: An automatic mechanism to support consensus reaching, Group Decision and Negotiation28 (2019), 585–617.
36.
ZhangB.W., LiangH.M., ZhangG.Q., Reaching a consensus with minimum adjustment in MAGDM with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets, Information Fusion42 (2018), 12–23.
37.
ZhangC., LiD.Y., LiangJ.Y., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic rough set over two universes model and its applications, International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics9 (2018), 577–588.
38.
ZhangC., LiD.Y., ZhaiY.H., et al., Multigranulation rough set model in hesitant fuzzy information systems and its application in personjob fit, International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics10 (2019), 717–729.
39.
ZhangH.D., ShuL., LiaoS.L., Hesitant fuzzy rough set over two universes and its application in decision making, Soft Computing21 (2015), 1–14.
40.
ZhangH.J., DongY.C., ChiclanaF., et al., Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design, European Journal of Operational Research275 (2019), 580–598.
41.
ZhangZ., GuoC.H., Deriving priority weights from intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations under group decision-making settings, Journal of the Operational Research Society68 (2017), 1582–1599.
42.
ZhangZ., KouX.Y., DongQ.X., Additive consistency analysis and improvement for hesitant fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications98 (2018), 118–128.
43.
ZhangZ., KouX.Y., YuW.Y., et al., On priority weights and consistency for incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations, Knowledge-Based Systems143 (2018), 115–126.
