The risk assessment of construction project investment based on prospect theory with linguistic preference orderings

Multiple experts decision-making (MEDM) can be regarded as a situation where a group of experts are invited to provide their opinions by evaluating the given alternatives, and then select the optimal alternative(s). As a useful linguistic expression model, linguistic preference orderings (LPOs) were established in which the order of alternatives and the relationships between two adjacent alternatives are fused well. Considering that prospect theory has the superiority in depicting risk attitudes (risk seeking for losses and risk aversion for gains) during the uncertain decision-making process, this paper develops a consensus model based on prospect theory to deal with MEDM problems with LPOs. Firstly, each LPO provided by expert is transformed into the responding DHLPR with complete consistency. Then, the reference point of expert is determined and the prospect preference matrix is established. Moreover, we can obtain the overall prospect consensus degree for a MEDM problem by calculating the similarity degree between individual and collective prospect preference matrix. Furthermore, a consensus improvement method is developed to complete the consensus reaching process. Finally, we apply the proposed method to deal with a practical MEDM problem involving the construction project investment, and make some comparative analyses with existing methods.National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) 71771155China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2020M680151Sichuan Postdoctoral Science special FoundationSichuan University Postdoctoral Interdisciplinary Innovation Startup FoundationFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities YJ202015European Union (EU) TIN2016-75850-RSichuan Province System Science and Enterprise Development Research Center Xq20B0

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