A contribution to consensus modeling in decision-making by means of linguistic assessments

Decision-making is an active field of research. Specifically, in recent times, a lot of contributions have been presented on decision-making under linguistic assessments. To tackle this kind of processes, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets have been introduced to grasp the uncertainty inherent in human reasoning when expressing preferences. This thesis introduces an extension of the set of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets to capture differences between non-compatible assessments. Based on this extension, a distance between linguistic assessments is defined to quantify differences between several opinions. This distance is used in turn to present a representative opinion from a group in a decision-making process. In addition, different consensus measures are introduced to determine the level of agreement or disagreement within a decision-making group and are used to define a decision maker’s profile to keep track of their dissension with respect to the group as well as their level of hesitancy. Furthermore, with the aim of allowing decision makers to choose the linguistic terms that they feel more comfortable with, the concept of free double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set is developed in this thesis. Finally, a new approach of the TOPSIS methodology for processes in which the assessments are given by means of free double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy information is presented to rank alternatives under these circumstances.Postprint (published version

A contribution to consensus modeling in decision-making by means of linguistic assessments

Decision-making is an active field of research. Specifically, in recent times, a lot of contributions have been presented on decision-making under linguistic assessments. To tackle this kind of processes, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets have been introduced to grasp the uncertainty inherent in human reasoning when expressing preferences. This thesis introduces an extension of the set of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets to capture differences between non-compatible assessments. Based on this extension, a distance between linguistic assessments is defined to quantify differences between several opinions. This distance is used in turn to present a representative opinion from a group in a decision-making process. In addition, different consensus measures are introduced to determine the level of agreement or disagreement within a decision-making group and are used to define a decision maker’s profile to keep track of their dissension with respect to the group as well as their level of hesitancy. Furthermore, with the aim of allowing decision makers to choose the linguistic terms that they feel more comfortable with, the concept of free double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set is developed in this thesis. Finally, a new approach of the TOPSIS methodology for processes in which the assessments are given by means of free double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy information is presented to rank alternatives under these circumstances

On fuzzy-qualitative descriptions and entropy

This paper models the assessments of a group of experts when evaluating different magnitudes, features or objects by using linguistic descriptions. A new general representation of linguistic descriptions is provided by unifying ordinal and fuzzy perspectives. Fuzzy qualitative labels are proposed as a generalization of the concept of qualitative labels over a well-ordered set. A lattice structure is established in the set of fuzzy-qualitative labels to enable the introduction of fuzzy-qualitative descriptions as L-fuzzy sets. A theorem is given that characterizes finite fuzzy partitions using fuzzy-qualitative labels, the cores and supports of which are qualitative labels. This theorem leads to a mathematical justification for commonly-used fuzzy partitions of real intervals via trapezoidal fuzzy sets. The information of a fuzzy-qualitative label is defined using a measure of specificity, in order to introduce the entropy of fuzzy-qualitative descriptions. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

An optimal feedback model to prevent manipulation behaviours in consensus under social network group decision making

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.A novel framework to prevent manipulation behaviour in consensus reaching process under social network group decision making is proposed, which is based on a theoretically sound optimal feedback model. The manipulation behaviour classification is twofold: (1) ‘individual manipulation’ where each expert manipulates his/her own behaviour to achieve higher importance degree (weight); and (2) ‘group manipulation’ where a group of experts force inconsistent experts to adopt specific recommendation advices obtained via the use of fixed feedback parameter. To counteract ‘individual manipulation’, a behavioural weights assignment method modelling sequential attitude ranging from ‘dictatorship’ to ‘democracy’ is developed, and then a reasonable policy for group minimum adjustment cost is established to assign appropriate weights to experts. To prevent ‘group manipulation’, an optimal feedback model with objective function the individual adjustments cost and constraints related to the threshold of group consensus is investigated. This approach allows the inconsistent experts to balance group consensus and adjustment cost, which enhances their willingness to adopt the recommendation advices and consequently the group reaching consensus on the decision making problem at hand. A numerical example is presented to illustrate and verify the proposed optimal feedback model

An overview on managing additive consistency of reciprocal preference relations for consistency-driven decision making and Fusion: Taxonomy and future directions

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.The reciprocal preference relation (RPR) is a powerful tool to represent decision makers’ preferences in decision making problems. In recent years, various types of RPRs have been reported and investigated, some of them being the ‘classical’ RPRs, interval-valued RPRs and hesitant RPRs. Additive consistency is one of the most commonly used property to measure the consistency of RPRs, with many methods developed to manage additive consistency of RPRs. To provide a clear perspective on additive consistency issues of RPRs, this paper reviews the consistency measurements of the different types of RPRs. Then, consistency-driven decision making and information fusion methods are also reviewed and classified into four main types: consistency improving methods; consistency-based methods to manage incomplete RPRs; consistency control in consensus decision making methods; and consistency-driven linguistic decision making methods. Finally, with respect to insights gained from prior researches, further directions for the research are proposed

Distributed Linguistic Representations in Decision Making: Taxonomy, Key Elements and Applications, and Challenges in Data Science and Explainable Artificial Intelligence

Distributed linguistic representations are powerful tools for modelling the uncertainty and complexity of preference information in linguistic decision making. To provide a comprehensive perspective on the development of distributed linguistic representations in decision making, we present the taxonomy of existing distributed linguistic representations. Then, we review the key elements and applications of distributed linguistic information processing in decision making, including the distance measurement, aggregation methods, distributed linguistic preference relations, and distributed linguistic multiple attribute decision making models. Next, we provide a discussion on ongoing challenges and future research directions from the perspective of data science and explainable artificial intelligence.National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) 71971039 71421001,71910107002,71771037,71874023 71871149Sichuan University sksyl201705 2018hhs-5

A systematic review on multi-criteria group decision-making methods based on weights: analysis and classification scheme

Interest in group decision-making (GDM) has been increasing prominently over the last decade. Access to global databases, sophisticated sensors which can obtain multiple inputs or complex problems requiring opinions from several experts have driven interest in data aggregation. Consequently, the field has been widely studied from several viewpoints and multiple approaches have been proposed. Nevertheless, there is a lack of general framework. Moreover, this problem is exacerbated in the case of experts’ weighting methods, one of the most widely-used techniques to deal with multiple source aggregation. This lack of general classification scheme, or a guide to assist expert knowledge, leads to ambiguity or misreading for readers, who may be overwhelmed by the large amount of unclassified information currently available. To invert this situation, a general GDM framework is presented which divides and classifies all data aggregation techniques, focusing on and expanding the classification of experts’ weighting methods in terms of analysis type by carrying out an in-depth literature review. Results are not only classified but analysed and discussed regarding multiple characteristics, such as MCDMs in which they are applied, type of data used, ideal solutions considered or when they are applied. Furthermore, general requirements supplement this analysis such as initial influence, or component division considerations. As a result, this paper provides not only a general classification scheme and a detailed analysis of experts’ weighting methods but also a road map for researchers working on GDM topics or a guide for experts who use these methods. Furthermore, six significant contributions for future research pathways are provided in the conclusions.The first author acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Universities [grant number FPU18/01471]. The second and third author wish to recognize their support from the Serra Hunter program. Finally, this work was supported by the Catalan agency AGAUR through its research group support program (2017SGR00227). This research is part of the R&D project IAQ4EDU, reference no. PID2020-117366RB-I00, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/ 501100011033.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version