Advertisement

Group Decision-Making with Multiple Types of Uncertain Linguistic Expressions: Stochastic Acceptability Analysis

  • Hai WangEmail author
  • Zeshui Xu
Chapter
Part of the Uncertainty and Operations Research book series (UOR)

Abstract

Uncertain linguistic opinions frequently take the form of ULEs such as ULTs, HFLTSs, EHFLTSs, and probabilistic linguistic term sets (PLTSs) rather than single linguistic terms. A stochastic approach will be introduced to handle GDM problems in which the performance values are expressed by HFLTSs or PLTSs and the weights of experts and criteria are unknown or partially unknown. Based on the involved probabilistic information, the real value of a linguistic variable and the uncertain weights are considered as stochastic variables.

References

  1. 1.
    Boran, F.E., Genç, S., Akay, D.: Personnel selection based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. Serv. Ind. 21(5), 493–503 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dong, Y.C., Chen, X., Herrera, F.: Minimizing adjusted simple terms in the consensus reaching process with hesitant linguistic assessments in group decision making. Inf. Sci. 297, 95–117 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kelemenis, A., Askounis, D.: A new topsis-based multi-criteria approach to personnel selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 37(7), 4999–5008 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lahdelma, R., Salminen, P.: SMAA-2: stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper. Res. 49(3), 444–454 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu, H.B., Rodríguez, R.M.: A fuzzy envelope for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application to multicriteria decision making. Inf. Sci. 258, 220–238 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li, Z.M., Xu, J.P., Lev, B., Gang, J.: Multi-criteria group individual research output evaluation based on context-free grammar judgments with assessing attitude. Omega 57, 282–293 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pang, Q., Wang, H., Xu, Z.S.: Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Inf. Sci. 369, 128–143 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodríguez, R.M., Martínez, L., Herrera, F.: Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 20(1), 109–119 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saaty, T.L.: Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Manag. Sci. 32(7), 841–855 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sackett, P.R., Lievens, F.: Personnel selection. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 59, 419–450 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tervonen, T., Lahdelma, R.: Implementing stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 178(2), 500–513 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, H., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J.: A stochastic approach for multi-criteria group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and probabilistic linguistic term sets. Technical report. Southeast University (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wu, Z.B., Xu, J.P.: Possibility distribution-based approach for MAGDM with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 46(3), 694–705 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xu, Z.S.: Uncertain linguistic aggregation operators based approach to multiple attribute group decision making under uncertain linguistic environment. Inf. Sci. 168(1), 171–184 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu, Z.S.: Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making. Omega 33(3), 249–254 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang, G.Q., Dong, Y.C., Xu, Y.F.: Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments. Inf. Fusion 17, 46–55 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information EngineeringNanjing Audit UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Business SchoolSichuan UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations