跳至主要内容

Extended TOPSISs for Belief Group Decision Making

Read  full  paper  at:
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=36#.VNhnpizQrzE

Author(s)  

ABSTRACT
Multiple attribute decision analysis (MADA) problems in the situation of belief group decision making (BGDM) are a special class of decision problems, where the attribute evaluations of each decision maker (DM) are represented by belief functions. In order to solve these special problems, in this paper, TOPSIS (technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution) model is extended by three approaches, by which group preferences are aggregated in different manners. Corresponding to the three approaches, three extended TOPSIS models, the pre-model, post-model, and inter-model, are developed and their procedures are elaborated step by step. Aggregating group preferences in the three extended models respectively depends on Dempster’s rule or its modifications, some social choice functions, and some mean approaches. Furthermore, a numerical example clearly illustrates the procedures of the three extended models for BGDM.
 
Cite this paper
C. Fu, "Extended TOPSISs for Belief Group Decision Making," Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 1 No. 1, 2008, pp. 11-20. doi: 10.4236/jssm.2008.11002.
 
References
[1]N. Bryson, A. Mobolurin, “A Process for Generating Quantitative Belief Functions”, European Journal of Operational Research, 115(3), 1999, pp. 624-633.
 
[2]C.T. Chen, “Extensions of the TOPSIS for Group Decision-Making under Fuzzy Environment”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 2000, pp. 1-9.
 
[3]C.T. Chen, C.T. Lin, and S.F. Huang, “A Fuzzy Approach for Supplier Evaluation and Selection in Supply Chain Management”, International Journal of Production Economics, 102(2), 2006, pp. 289-301.
 
[4]T.C. Chu, “Facility Location Selection Using Fuzzy TOPSIS under Group Decisions”, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 10(6), 2002, pp. 687-701.
 
[5]A. Dempster, “Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by Multivalued Mapping”, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 38, 1967, pp. 325-339.
 
[6]H. Deng, C.H. Yeh, and R. J. Willis, “Inter-Company Comparison Using Modified TOPSIS with Objective Weights”, Computers & Operations Research, 27(10), 2000, pp. 963-973.
 
[7]Y. Deng, W. Shi, Z Zhu, and Q Liu, “Combining belief functions based on distance of evidence”, Decision Support Systems, 38(3), 2004, pp. 489-493.
 
[8]D. Dubois, H. Prade, “Representation and combination of uncertainty with belief functions and possibility measures”, Computational Intelligence, 4, 1998, pp. 244-264.
 
[9]Z. Elouedi, K. Mellouli, and P. Smets, “Belief Decision Trees: Theoretical Foundations”, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 28(2-3), 2001, pp. 91-124.
 
[10]C. Fu, S.L. Yang, X. Ji, “A Pre-Extension of TOPSIS for Belief Group Decision Making”, International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM, 2007, pp. 5725-5728.
 
[11]C. Fu, S.L. Yang, “Solutions to Belief Group Decision Making Using Extended TOPSIS”, International Conference on Management Science and Engineering, 2007, pp. 458-463.
 
[12]C. Fu, S.L. Yang, W.X. Lu, “An Extended TOPSIS for Belief Group Decision Making”, International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, 2007, pp. 551-555.
 
[13]R. Haenni, “Are alternatives to Dempster’s rule of combination real alternatives? Comments on “About the belief function combination and the conflict management problem””, Information Fusion, 3(4), 2002, pp. 237-239.
 
[14]C.L. Hwang, M.J. Lin, Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
 
[15]C.L. Hwang, and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981.
 
[16]G.R. Jahanshahloo, F.H. Lotfi, and M. Izadikhah, “Extension of the TOPSIS Method for Decision-Making Problems with Fuzzy Data”, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181(2), 2006, pp. 1544-1551.
 
[17]G.R. Jahanshahloo, F.H. Lotfi and M. Izadikhah, “An Algorithmic Method to Extend TOPSIS for Decision-Making Problems with Interval Data”, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175(2), 2006, pp. 1375-1384.
 
[18]M.S. Kuo, G.H. Tzeng, and W.C. Huang, “Group Decision-Making Based on Concepts of Ideal and Anti-ideal Points in a Fuzzy Environment”, Mathematics and Computer Modelling, vol. 45, no. 3-4, 324-339, Feb. 2007.
 
[19]E. Lefevre, O. Colot, and P. Vannoorenberghe, “Belief function combination and conflict management”, Information Fusion, 3, 2002, pp. 149-162.
 
[20]D.F. Li, “Compromise Ratio Method for Fuzzy Multi-attribute Group Decision Making”, Applied Soft Computing, 7(3), 2007, pp. 807-817.
 
[21]C.K. Murphy, “Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts”, Decision Support Systems, 29(1), 2000, pp. 1-9.
 
[22]T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process (edition 2), RWS publication, Pittsburgh, PA, 1990.
 
[23]G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton: Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1976.
 
[24]A. Shanian, O. Savadogo, “TOPSIS Multiple-criteria Decision Support Analysis for Material Selection of Metallic Bipolar Plates for Polymer Electrolyte Fuel Cell”, Journal of Power Sources, 159(2), 2006, pp. 1095-1104.
 
[25]H.S. Shih, H.J. Shyur, and E.S. Lee, “An Extension of TOPSIS for Group Decision Making”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(7-8), 2007, pp. 801-813.
 
[26]P. Smets, “The combination of evidence in the transferable belief model”, IEEE Transaction on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 12(5), 1990, pp. 447-458.
 
[27]P. Smets, “Analyzing the combination of conflicting belief functions”, Information Fusion, 8(4), 2007, pp. 387-412.
 
[28]P. Smets, K. Kennes, “The Transferable Belief Model”, Artificial Intelligence, 66 (2), 1994, pp. 191-234.
 
[29]T.C. Wang, T.H. Chang, “Application of TOPSIS in Evaluating Initial Training Aircraft under a Fuzzy Environment”, Expert Systems with Applications, 33(4), 2007, pp. 870-880.
 
[30]Y.M. Wang, Y. Luo, and Z.S. Hua, “A Note on Group Decision-Making Based on Concepts of Ideal and Anti-ideal Points in a Fuzzy Environment”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(9-10), 2007, pp. 1256-1264
 
[31]S.K.M. Wong, P. Lingras, “Representation of Qualitative User Preference by Quantitative Belief Functions”, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 6(1), 1994, pp. 72-78.
 
[32]R.R. Yager, “On the Dempster-Shafer Framework and New Combination Rules”, Information Sciences, 41(2), 1987, pp. 93-137.
 
[33]R.R. Yager, “Quasi-associative operations in the combination of evidence”, Kybernetes, 16, 1987, 37-41.
 
[34]A.Ben Yaghlane, T. Denoeux, and K. Mellouli, “Constructing Belief Functions from Qualitative Expert Opinions”, Information and Communication Technologies, ICTTA’06, 1, 2006, pp. 1363-1368.
 
[35]J.B. Yang, “Rule and Utility Based Evidential Reasoning Approach for Multiattribute Decision Analysis under Uncertainties”, European Journal of Operational Research, 131, 2001, pp. 31-61.
 
[36]M. Zeleny, “A Concept of Compromise Solutions and the Method of the Displaced Ideal”, Computers and Operations Research, 1(3-4), 1974, pp. 479-496.                                                    eww150209lx
标签：

评论

发表评论

此博客中的热门博文

Does Immigration Promote the Investment of the Monopolistic Firm?

In the present paper, we examine the effect of increasing uncertainty of immigrants’ growth on the optimal timing of investment of a firm that has a monopolistic power over the labor market. It is revealed that when the uncertainty of immigrants’ growth is more than a threshold level, increasing uncertainty of immigrants’ growth accelerates the optimal timing of firms’ investment and enhances the economic growth, even if the uncertainty of immigrants’ growth is formulated by the geometric Brownian motion, which is in sharp contrast to the standard result that an increase in the uncertainty postpones the optimal timing. With an increase in the immigrants over the past ten years, workforces in the host countries have been growing significantly to the extent that the immigrants represent 70% of the increase in the workforce in Europe, and 47% in the United States as OECD indicates. In the present paper, we attempted to investigate the effect of increased uncertainty caused by the growi...
发表评论
阅读全文

Education Policy Implementation: A Mechanism for Enhancing Primary Education Development in Zanzibar

Education is one of the fundamental rights of individuals; therefore, the government of a country needs to develop and strengthen educational policy and quality as well as to ensure that everyone has equal access to basic education. The improvement of access and quality of education in the world is becoming as an essential factor in development, whereas the basic education (primary school), is acknowledged as a foundation of the higher educational development for every country. To fulfill this goal, governments introduce several policies and procedures; however, it requires some reforms and participation from the politician, policymakers, and other stakeholders to re-examine educational policy so that it can lead to multiplication and betterment of the reforms. Educational reforms actually focus on accountability. A positive educational development and reform is very challenging and needs more effort and strategy on how to use and utilize the resources effectively as such it can achie...
发表评论
阅读全文