The study is devoted to the development of decision support systems in the expert assessment of social risk

Asadullaev, R. G.

Lifirenko, M. V.

Lomakin, V. V.

Reznichenko, O. S.

Shapovalova, I. S.

DSpace at Belgorod State University

Asian Journal of Information Technology 15 (12): 1945-1948, 2016 ISSN: 1682-3915© Medwell Journals, 2016____________________________________Decision Support System for the Expert Assessment of Social RisksV.V. Lomakin, I.S. Shapovalova, M.V. Lifirenko, R.G. Asadullaev and O.S. Reznichenko Belgorod State University, Pobedy St. 85, 308015 Belgorod, RussiaAbstract: The study is devoted to the development of decision support systems in the expert assessment of social risks. A list of major social risks are exposed to the technosphere and the factors that affect them. Produced by means of a formal hierarchy that reflects the relationship of social risks and the factors influencing them. The choice of the method of decision-making for the implementation of decision support systems and expert group scheme of interaction with the system. A revision of the existing method of valuation of coherence which will improve the validity of recommendations for improving the coherence pairwise comparisons matrix. The proposed approach will enable to implement a decision support system with the expert assessment of social risks.Key words: Decision support system, expert system, pairwise comparison matrixes conformity, social technologies, social risksINTRODUCTIONIn modem conditions, the risk assessment is an important element of decision theoretical base in policy and economy. Establishment of cause and effect relations between the parameters characterizing heterogeneity of technogenic factors and possible negative social consequences as well as quantitative assessment of the last approach probability allow to organize forecasting of social risks.Until now, inconsistency of expert positions concerning essence of this process generates separation and discrepancy of approaches to its regulation and improvement. Differences in theoretical positions in this branch of scientific knowledge generates the corresponding problems in social practice. Therefore, the tools allowing to carry out social risks assessment and interrelations between factors on a wide range of criteria are necessary in this situation. These means are also important for the reason that each risk has to be estimated in relation to a certain sphere of personal life. Thus, development of the Decision Support System (DSS) for social risk assessment on the basis of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as well as improvement of this method for achieving more reasonable calculations of alternatives is an important task.MATERIALS AND METHODSWe offer application of AHP (Saaty, 1990a, b) allowing to carry out independent expert assessment bothnumerical and qualitative to receive the total result considering opinion of all expert groups. For solution of the problem specified methods of the system analysis, decision theory and optimization were used in introduction.Main part: In practice, application of this method requires creating informational decision support in the form of purposes, criteria and alternatives hierarchies. DSS (Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2014a) allows to make a multi-criteria assessment of alternatives on the basis of expert assessment, empirical and statistical data. Such functionality is provided due to application of hierarchy analysis method and its modifications. The main feature of this system is that output results pay off not only on objective indicators but also on subjective (preferences of people). Thus, under conditions of exact mathematical means lack for the social risk assessment description system offered by us and developments of anti-risk managing decisions mainly is based on formal representation of human experience and intuition.During the conducted researches (Asadullayev and Lomakin, 2015) the list of the main social risks subjected to influence of techno-sphere was received: demographic situation deterioration;unemployment; population marginalization; the compelled migration; disadaptation; decline in life quality; crime wave; social tension growth; protest activity growth; terrorism wave. The social risk assessment hierarchy, we offered according to analytic hierarchy the process of looks as followsCorresponding Author: V.V. Lomakin, Belgorod State University, Pobedy St. 85, 308015 Belgorod, Russia1945Asian J. Inform. TechnoL, 15 (12): 1945-1948, 2016Fig. 1: Hierarchy assess social risks by the analytic hierarchy processRanked alternatives 10 «лииол or me problemFig. 2: Scheme of expert decision support system interaction(Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2014b) (Fig. 1). During the features analysis of AHP (Saaty,1993; Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2014a; Saaty, 1990a) practical applicatioin the social and economic sphere we offered the following scheme of expert interaction with DSS and its separate modules. On the scheme (Fig. 2) separate system blocks are allocated:The database stores the saved-up information during system work (assessment, statement, rule, interrelation between entities and data)The system of the entrance data collecting for the analysis allows to collect data from three sources: expert assessment, empirical data and statistics The system of entrance data processing prepares entrance data for calculations and brings unified look1946Asian J. Inform. Technol., 15 (12): 1945-1948, 2016• The decision support system kernel makesinterrelations of the located information among themselves and performs probability or priority calculation for several optionIn practical application of AHP with a large criteria and alternatives number as in the case presented by us,difficulties in receiving the coordinated Pairwise Comparison Matrixes (PCM) take place and can influence the accuracy of the calculated ponderabilities. Decision procedure on the AHP basis means carrying out rather large number of pairwise comparisons. The total of pairwise comparisons of N can be calculated by Eq. 1:N = ekn(n -1) + k(k -1) 0 )Where:e = Total of experts assessing alternatives decisions on all criteriaк = Amount of criteria by which comparison of alternatives is made n = Amount of solution alternatives of the considered problemAs the hierarchy offered by us is rather voluminous (N>470), it is expedient to apply in the course of poll methods assessment of the expert judgment coherence and methods of coherence degree increase (Cao et al., 2008; Ishizaka and Lusti, 2004; Harker, 1987). In the study (Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2013) algorithms allowing to cany out the expert support on increasing the degree of PCM coherence were offered. The offered algorithms were intended for identification and automatic correction of the specific judgments influencing low coherence of pairwise comparisons. Application of these approaches allows to carry out an assessment of separate pairwise comparisons coherence but in practice it did not lead to right results in all cases. The analysis showed that calculation of a matrix of angle cosines on the vectors made only of PCM lines yields less exact result as pairwise comparisons take place. In this regard calculation of an average angle cosine for couples of vectors made of lines and columns of PCM elements is offered (Babaeian et al., 2015a-cuses an angle constraint to help to modify the performance of shortest paths.RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONIn that case two angle cosines are previously calculated (between vectors, PCM made of lines) and o^tann _ (^etWeen the vectors made of MPC columns) by Eq. 2:г 1к л  a jkcolumn   k=  1г к1 л  a kjГ, , ■'*' 8= Г, ,J z x z xV к  = 1 к=1 V к  = 1 к=  1(2)Then calculation formula of an average angle cosine 4'„ for couples of vectors offered in (Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2013) will change to = 1|;ц1т^ 1|;ц“1иш/2. Change of a formula will not affect sequence of the further calculations described by Lomakin and Lifirenko (2013) for calculation of the general PCM coherence indicator and canying out the expert judgments interpretation in need of the automatic or automated correction.Let us show application of the offered approach on one PCM example. Let us assume that during assessment of alternatives the expert received PCM A^CR = 1.045).Here, the mistake is made: a13= 1/8 though it has tobe а,т = 8:4 Ш  1 2 1 /2  12 4A, ='  1 1/ 41/ 22  ^1/ 2  1/ 4  1(3)In that case before the expert there is a problem of matrix correction since Conformity Relation (CR) is high. Let us calculate matrixes of angle cosines; it is comparable to the corrected PCM received with their help with the described algorithm of automatic adjustment (Lomakin and Lifirenko, 2013):\^ j  line _f  1 0.520.52 10.287 0.248 0.52f  10.248 0.287 0.2480.287 0.52 ^0.248 11 0.2481 0.248 1 j0.248 0.287 0.248^ 1 0.52 10.52 1 0.521 0.52 1 j(4)total __s p l i n e  \ j j cf  1 0.384 0.287 0.384'''0.384 1 0.384 10.287 0.384 1 0.3840.384 1 0.384 1(5)Let us receive angle cosines matrixes on the basis of , Ч,,;,;,1шМ|, Ч',оЫ, the relevantly corrected PCM isд Н г е  ^ c o lu m n  ^ to t a l  .1947Asian J. Inform. Technol., 15 (12): 1945-1948, 2016M  2 1/3 1^1/2 1 1/9 13 9 1 5v 1 1 1/5 \ j'1  1/5 1/3 1/9 ^5 1 1 13 1 1 1/21 2 1'  1 4 9 21/4 1 2 1/21/9 1/2 1 1/4vl/2 2 4 1Having compared the received PCM A1™ , Acd™ , Atotal, it is possible to draw a conclusion that assessment approach of coherence on the basis of vectors from elements of PCM lines and vectors from elements of columns works more effectively, since the matrix A,i:i,iJ corrects wrong pair comparison of a matrix A,.CONCLUSIONThus, this approach will allow experts to control process of assessment and to raise the received result trust degree. The developed DSS will allow to cany out the multicriteria analysis of social risks that will give an opportunity to receive more exact results in comparison with the known declarative methods applied in this sphere. Operability of DSS on the Internet will allow to increase considerably the number of the social risks analysis participants as well as to conduct distal surveys. The offered information means will allow to automate processes of obtaining entrance information (expert, statistical and empirical), assessment of the entered data discrepancy and logical reliability of the received result.REFERENCESAsadullayev, R.G. and V.V. Lomakin, 2015. Formal means of forecasting and social risk management. Scientific bulletin of the Belgorod State University: Scientific magazine, Belgorod: "Belgorod" Publishing House, pp: 150-156.Babaeian, A., A. Bayestehtashk and M. Bandarabadi, 2015c. Multiple manifold clustering using curvature constrained path. PLoS ONE, Vol. 10. 10.1371 /journal.pone. 0137 986 Babaeian, A., A. Bayestehtashlc, M. Babaee, M. Bandarabadi, A. Ghadesi and A. Dourado, 2015b. (6) Angle constrained path for clustering of multiplemanifolds. Proceedings of the 2015 ШЕЕ International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), September 27-30, 2015, QC., Canada, pp: 4446-4450.Babaeian, A., M. Babaee, A. Bayestehtashk and M. Bandarabadi, 2015a. Nonlinear subspaceclustering using curvature constrained distances. Pattern Recognit. Lett., 68: 118-125.Cao, D., L.C. Leung and J.S. Law, 2008. Modifying inconsistent comparison matrix in analytic hierarchy process: A heuristic approach. Decis. Support Syst., 44: 944-953.Harker, P.Т., 1987. Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process. Math. Modell., 9: 837-848. Ishizaka, A. and M. Lusti, 2004. An expert module to improve the consistency of AHP matrices. Int. Trans. Oper. Res., 11: 97-105.Lomakin, V.V. and M.V. Lifirenko, 2013. Algorithm of coherence degree increase for matrix of pair comparisons when canying out expert polls. Basic Res., 11: 1798-1803.Lomakin, V.V. andM. V. Lifirenko, 2014a. Decision support system with the automated means of expert judgment correction. Scientific bulletin of the Belgorod State University: Scientific magazine, Belgorod: "Belgorod" Publishing House, pp: 114-120.Lomakin, V.V. andM.V. Lifirenko, 2014b. Supporting tools for decision making in the outdoor lighting control systems. Res. J. Applied Sci., 9: 1185-1190.Saaty, Т., 1993. The hierarchy analysis method. Radio and communication, Moscow, pp: 278.Saaty, T.L., 1990a. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. University of Pittsburgh, USA., Pages: 287.Saaty, T.L., 1990b. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process?. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 48: 9-26.д  line  __1948

Decision support system for the expert assessment of social risks

http://dspace.bsu.edu.ru/bitstream/123456789/20554/1/Lomakin_Decision_16.pdf

Decision support system for the expert assessment of social risks

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DSpace at Belgorod State University