Expected consistency-based model and multiplicative DEA cross-efficiency for group decision-making with incomplete distribution linguistic preference relations
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June 21, 2021
Expected consistency-based model and multiplicative DEA cross-efficiency for group decision-making with incomplete distribution linguistic preference relations
Faced with complex decision problems, distribution linguistic preference relation (DLPR) is an effective way for decision-makers (DMs) to express preference information. However, due to the complexity of the decision-making environment, DMs may not be able to provide complete linguistic distribution for all linguistic terms in DLPRs, which results in incomplete DLPRs. Therefore, in order to solve group decision-making (GDM) with incomplete DLPRs, this paper proposes expected consistency-based model and multiplicative DEA cross-efficiency. For a given incomplete DLPRs, we first propose an optimization model to obtain complete DLPR. This optimization model can evaluate the missing linguistic distribution and ensure that the obtained DLPR has a high consistency level. And then, we develop a transformation function that can transform DLPRs into multiplicative preference relations (MPRs). Furthermore, we design an improved multiplicative DEA model to obtain the priority vector of MPR for ranking all alternatives. Finally, a numerical example is provided to show the rationality and applicability of the proposed GDM method.
TaninoT., Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making, Fuzzy Sets and Systems12(2) (1984), 117–131.
2.
ZadehL.A., The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-III, Information Sciences9(1) (1975), 43–80.
3.
SongY. and HuJ., Large-scale group decision making with multiple stakeholders based on probabilistic linguistic preference relation, Applied Soft Computing80 (2019), 712–722.
4.
PangQ., WangH. and XuZ., Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making, Information Sciences369 (2016), 128–143.
5.
HerreraF., Herrera-ViedmaE. and verdegayJ.L., A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments, Fuzzy Sets and Systems78(1) (1996), 73–87.
6.
ZhangG., DongY. and XuY., Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments, Information Fusion17 (2014), 46–55.
7.
TangX., PengZ., ZhangQ., PedryczW. and YangS., Consistency and consensus-driven models to personalize individual semantics of linguistic terms for supporting group decision making with distribution linguistic preference relations, Knowledge-Based Systems189 (2020), 105078–.
8.
TangX., ZhangQ., PengZ., YangS. and PedryczW., Derivation of personalized numerical scales from distribution linguistic preference relations: an expected consistency-based goal programming approach, Neural Computing and Applications31(12) (2019), 8769–8786.
9.
LiC., GaoY. and DongY., Managing ignorance elements and personalized individual semantics under incomplete linguistic distribution context in group decision making, Group Decision and Negotiation30(1) (2021), 97–118.
10.
ZhangB., LiangH., GaoY. and ZhangG., The optimization-based aggregation and consensus with minimum-cost in group decision making under incomplete linguistic distribution context, Knowledge-Based Systems162 (2018), 92–102.
11.
SunB. and MaW., An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application, Omega51 (2015), 83–92.
12.
JinF., NiZ., ChenH. and LiY., Approaches to decision making with linguistic preference relations based on additive consistency, Applied Soft Computing49 (2016), 71–80.
13.
Herrera-ViedmaE., HerreraF., ChiclanaF. and LuqueM., Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations, European Journal of Operational Research154 (2004), 98–109.
14.
XuY., LiuX. and WangH., The additive consistency measure of fuzzy reciprocal preference relations, International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics9(7) (2017), 1141–1152.
15.
JinF., PeiL., LiuJ., ZhouL. and ChenH., Decision-making model with fuzzy preference relations based on consistency local adjustment strategy and DEA, Neural Computing and Applications32(15) (2020), 11607–11620.
16.
SaatyT., A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology15(3) (1977), 234–281.
17.
SaatyT., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, MacGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
18.
WangH. and XuZ., Interactive algorithms for improving incomplete linguistic preference relations based on consistency measures, Applied Soft Computing42 (2016), 66–79.
19.
Xu, A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations, Information Science166 (2004), 19–30.
20.
CharnesA., CooperW., SeifordL. and StutzJ., A multiplicative model for efficiency analysis, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences16(5) (1982), 223–224.
21.
RamanathanR., Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process, Computer and Operations Research33(5) (2006), 1289–1307.
22.
LiuJ., FangS. and ChenH., Multiplicative data envelopment analysis cross-efficiency and stochastic weight space acceptability analysis for group decision making with interval multiplicative preference relations, Information Sciences514 (2020), 319–332.
23.
ZhangY., XuZ., WangH. and LiaoH., Consistency-based risk assessment with probabilistic linguistic preference relation, Applied Soft Computing49 (2016), 817–833.
24.
Herrera-ViedmaE., HerreraF. and ChiclanaF., A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans32(3) (2002), 394–402.
25.
TangX., ZhangQ., PengZ., PedryczW. and YangS., Distribution linguistic preference relations with incomplete symbolic proportions for group decision making, Applied Soft Computing88 (2020), 106005–.
26.
ZhangZ., HaoW., YuX., ChenJ. and XuY., A Bayesian approach to incomplete fuzzy reciprocal preference relations in consensus reaching process and its application in project performance evaluations, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems37(1) (2019), 1415–1434.
27.
JinF., NiZ., PeiL., ChenH., LiY., ZhuX. and NiL., A decision support model for group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic preferences relations, Neural Computing and Applications31(2) (2019), 1103–1124.
28.
LinM., ZhanQ., XuZ. and ChenR., Group decision-making model with hesitant multiplicative preference relations based on regression method and feedback mechanism, IEEE Access6 (2018), 61130–61150.
29.
LinY. and WangY., Prioritization of hesitant multiplicative preference relations based on data envelopment analysis for group decision making, Neural Computing and Applications31(2) (2019), 437–447.
30.
WuY., ZhangZ., KouG., ZhangH., ChaoX., LiC., DongY. and HerreraF., Distributed linguistic representations in decision making: Taxonomy, key elements and applications, and challenges in data science and explainable artificial intelligence, Information Fusion65 (2021), 165–178.
31.
CharnesA., CooperW.W. and RhodesE., Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, European Journal of Operational Research2(6) (1978), 429–444.
32.
SextonT.R., SilkmanR.H. and HoganA.J., Data envelopment analysis: Critique and extensions, New Directions for Program Evaluation32 (1986), 73–105.
33.
DoyleJ. and GreenR., Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses, Journal of the Operations Research Society45 (1994), 567–578.
34.
HesamianG. and ShamsM., Measuring similarity and ordering based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems28 (2015), 983–990.
35.
WuD., Performance evaluation: An integrated method using data envelopment analysis and fuzzy preference relations, European Journal of Operational Research194(1) (2009), 227–235.
36.
LiuJ., XuQ., ChenH., ZhouL., ZhuJ. and TaoZ., Group decision making with interval fuzzy preference relations based on DEA and stochastic simulation, Neural Computing and Applications31 (2019), 3095–3106.
37.
ChuJ., LiuX. and WangY., Social network analysis based approach to group decision making problem with fuzzy preference relations, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems31(3) (2016), 1271–1285.
38.
RodriguezR., MartinezL. and HerreraF., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making, 20(1) (2012), 109–119.
39.
ZhuB. and XuZ., Consistency measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems22(1) (2014), 35–45.
40.
GouX., LiaoH., XuZ., MinR. and HerreraF., Group decision making with double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations: Consistency based measures, index and repairing algorithms and decision model, Information Sciences489 (2019), 93–112.
41.
GouX., XuZ., LiaoH. and HerreraF., Consensus model handling minority opinions and noncooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision-making under double hierarchy linguistic preference relations, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics51(1) (2020), 283–296.
42.
GouX., XuZ., WangX. and LiaoH., Managing consensus reaching process with self-confident double hierarchy linguistic preference relations in group decision making, Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making20(1) (2021), 51–79.
43.
GouX., LiaoH., XuZ. and HerreraF., Double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic MULTIMOORA method for evaluating the implementation status of haze controlling measures, Information Fusion38 (2017), 22–34.
44.
GouX. and XuZ., Novel basic operational laws for linguistic terms, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and probabilistic linguistic term sets, Information Sciences372 (2016), 407–427.
