Uniformization of multigranular linguistic labels and their application to group decision making

Abstract

In multiple attribute group decision making (MAGDM) problems based on linguistic information, the granularities of linguistic label sets are usually different due to the differences of thinking modes and habits among decision makers. In order to deal with this inconvenience, the transformation relationships among multigranular linguistic labels (TRMLLs), which are applied to unify linguistic labels with different granularities into a certain linguistic label set with fixed granularity, are presented in this paper. Furthermore, the reference tables are made according to TRMLLs so that the interrelated calculation will be less complicated, and the method of how to use them is explained in detail. At length, the TRMLLs are illustrated through an application example.

Keywords

Multiple attribute group decision making (MAGDM) / transformation relationships / multigranular / linguistic label set

References

[1] Bordogna G., Fedrizzi M., Passi G.. A linguistic modelling of consensus in group decision making based on OWA operator. IEEE Transactions on System, Man and Cybernetics, 1997, 27: 126-132.

[2] Bordogna G., Passi G.. A fuzzy linguistic approach generalizing Boolean information retrieval: a model and its evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1993, 44: 70-82.

[3] Carlsson C., Fullér R.. Benchmaking and linguistic importance weighted aggregations. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2000, 114: 35-42.

[4] Chang P., Chen Y.. A fuzzy multicriteria decision making method for technology transfer strategy selection in biotechnology. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1994, 63: 131-139.

[5] Cordón O., Herrera F., Zwir I.. Linguistic modeling by hierarchical systems of linguistic rules. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2002, 10: 2-20.

[6] Dai Y.Q., Xu Z.S., Li Y., Da Q.L.. New assessment labels based on linguistic information and applications. Chinese Management Science, 2008, 16(2): 145-149.

[7] Degani R., Bortolan G.. The problem of linguistic approximation in clinical decision making. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1988, 2: 143-162.

[8] Harsanyi J.C.. Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 1955, 63: 309-321.

[9] Herrera F., Herrera-Viedma E., Martínez L.. A fusion approach for managing multigranular linguistic term sets in decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2000, 114: 43-58.

[10] Herrera F., Herrera-Viedma E., Verdegay J.L.. A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1996, 78: 73-87.

[11] Herrera F., Martínez L.. A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with multigranular hierarchical linguistic contexts in multi-expert decision-making. IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 2001, 31: 227-233.

[12] Herrera-Viedma E., Martínez L., Mata F., Chiclana F.. A consensus support systems model for group decision making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2005, 13: 644-658.

[13] Köksalan M., Ulu C.. An interactive approach for placing alternatives in preference classes. European Journal of Operational Research, 2003, 144: 429-439.

[14] Law C.K.. Using fuzzy numbers in educational grading system. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1996, 83: 311-323.

[15] Lee H.. Group decision making using fuzzy sets theory for evaluating the rate of aggregative risk in software development. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1996, 80: 261-271.

[16] Martínez L., Liu J., Yang J.B., Herrera F.. A multigranular hierarchical linguistic model for design evaluation based on safely and cost analysis. International Journal of Intelligent systems, 2005, 20: 1161-1194.

[17] Ngwenyama O., Bryson N.. Eliciting and mapping qualitative preferences to numeric rankings in group decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 1999, 116: 487-497.

[18] Torra V.. Negation functions based semantics for ordered linguistic labels. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 1996, 11: 975-988.

[19] Xu Z.S.. A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations. Information Sciences, 2004, 166: 19-30.

[20] Xu Z.S.. EOWA and EOWG operators for aggregation linguistic labels based on linguistic preference relations. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 2004, 12: 791-810.

[21] Xu Z.S.. An interactive approach to multiple attribute group decision making with multigranular uncertain linguistic information. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2009, 18: 119-145.

[22] Xu Z.S., Da Q.L.. An overview of operators for aggregating information. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 2003, 18: 953-969.

[23] Yager R.R.. An approach to ordinal decision making. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1995, 12: 237-261.

[24] Yager R.R.. Fusion of ordinal information using weighted median aggregation. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1998, 18: 35-52.

[25] Yager R.R., Goldstein L.S., Mendels E.. FUZMAR: an approach to aggregating market research data based on fuzzy reasoning. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1994, 68: 1-11.