Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Preferences and Decisions pp 139–158Cite as

Qualitative Bipolar Decision Rules: Toward More Expressive Settings

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 257))

Abstract

An approach to multicriteria decision-making previously developed by the authors is reviewed. The idea is to choose between alternatives based on an analysis of the pros and the cons, i.e. positive or negative arguments having various strengths.Arguments correspond to criteria or affects of various levels of importance and ranging on a very crude value scale containing only three elements: good, neutral or bad. The basic decision rule in this setting is based on two ideas: focusing on the most important affects, and when comparing the merits of two alternatives considering that an argument against one alternative can be counted as an argument in favour of the other. It relies on a bipolar extension of comparative possibility ordering. Lexicographic refinements of this crude decision rule turn out to be cognitively plausible, and to generalise a well-known choice heuristics. It can also be encoded in Cumulative Prospect Theory. The paper lays bare several lines of future research, especially an alternative to the bicapacity approach to bipolar decision-making, that subsumes both Cumulative Prospect Theory and our qualitative bipolar choice rule. Moreover, an extension of the latter to non-Boolean arguments is outlined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amgoud, L., Cayrol, C., Lagasquie-Schiex, M.-C., Livet, P.: On bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. Int. J. of Intelligent Systems 23(10), 1062–1093 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Amgoud, L., Prade, H.: Using arguments for making and explaining decisions. Artificial Intelligence 173(3-4), 413–436 (2009)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Benferhat, S., Dubois, D., Kaci, S., Prade, H.: Bipolar possibility theory in preference modeling: Representation, fusion and optimal solutions. Information Fusion 7, 135–150 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bilbao, J.M., Fernandez, J.R., Jiménez Losada, A., Lebrón, E.: Bicooperative games. In: Bilbao, J.M. (ed.) Cooperative games on combinatorial structures, pp. 23–26. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bonnefon, J.-F., Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Prade, H.: On the qualitative comparison of decisions having positive and negative features. J. Artificial Intelligence Research 32, 385–417 (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Bonnefon, J.F., Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Leblois, S.: Qualitative heuristics for balancing the pros and cons. Theory and Decision 65, 71–85 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Boutilier, C., Brafman, R.I., Domshlak, C., Hoos, H.H., Poole, D.: CP-nets: A tool for representing and reasoning with conditional ceteris paribus preference statements. J. Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 21, 135–191 (2004)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Cacioppo, J.T., Berntson, G.G.: Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. Psychological Bulletin 115, 401–423 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chateauneuf, A.: Decomposable capacities, distorted probabilities and concave capacities. Mathematical Social Sciences 31(1), 19–37 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Deschamps, R., Gevers, L.: Leximin and utilitarian rules: a joint characterization. J. of Economic Theory 17, 143–163 (1978)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Doyle, J., Thomason, R.: Background to qualitative decision theory. The AI Magazine 20(2), 55–68 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dubois, D.: Belief structures, possibility theory and decomposable confidence measures on finite sets. Computers and Artificial Intelligence 5(5), 403–416 (1986)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Dubois, D., Fargier, H.: On the qualitative comparison of sets of positive and negative affects. In: Godo, L. (ed.) ECSQARU 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3571, pp. 305–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Prade, H., Sabbadin, R.: A survey of qualitative decision rules under uncertainty. In: Bouyssou, D., Dubois, D., Pirlot, M., Prade, H. (eds.) Decision-Making Process- Concepts and Methods, ch. 11, pp. 435–473. Wiley, Chichester (2009), http://www.wiley.com/

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Possibility Theory. Plenum Press, New York (1988)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Bipolar representations in reasoning, knowledge extraction and decision processes. In: Greco, S., Hata, Y., Hirano, S., Inuiguchi, M., Miyamoto, S., Nguyen, H.S., Słowiński, R. (eds.) RSCTC 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4259, pp. 15–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: An introduction to bipolar representations of information and preference. Int. J. Intelligent Systems. 23(8), 866–877 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Formal representations of uncertainty. In: Bouyssou, D., Dubois, D., Pirlot, M., Prade, H. (eds.) Decision-Making Process- Concepts and Methods, ch. 3, pp. 85–156. Wiley, Chichester (2009), http://www.wiley.com/

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: An overview of the asymmetric bipolar representation of positive and negative information in possibility theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 160, 1355–1366 (2009)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Dubois, D., Prade, H., Sabbadin, R.: Decision-theoretic foundation of qualitative possibility theory. European J. of Operational Research 128, 478–495 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Fargier, H., Sabbadin, R.: Qualitative decision under uncertainty: Back to expected utility. Artificial Intelligence 164, 245–280 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Franklin, B.: Letter to J. B. Priestley, 1772. In: Bigelow, J. (ed.) The Complete Works. Putnam, New York (1887)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Giang, P.H., Shenoy, P.P.: Two axiomatic approaches to decision-making using possibility theory. European J. of Operational Research 162, 450–467 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Gigerenzer, G., Goldstein, D.G.: Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review 103, 650–669 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M., the ABC group: Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Grabisch, M.: The Moebius transform on symmetric ordered structures and its application to capacities on finite sets. Discrete Math 28(1-3), 17–34 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Grabisch, M., Greco, S., Pirlot, M.: Bipolar and bivariate models in multicriteria decision analysis: Descriptive and constructive approaches. Int. J. Intelligent Systems. 23(9), 930–969 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Grabisch, M., Labreuche, C.: Bi-capacities for decision making on bipolar scales. In: EUROFUSE 2002 Workshop on Information Systems, pp. 185–190 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Grabisch, M., Labreuche, C.: Bi-capacities — parts I and II. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 151(2), 211–260 (2005)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Slowinski, R.: Bipolar Sugeno and Choquet integrals. In: EUROFUSE Workshop on Information Systems, Varenna, pp. 191–196 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Labreuche, C., Grabisch, M.: Generalized Choquet-like aggregation functions for handling bipolar scales. Eur. J. of Operational Research 172(3), 931–955 (2006)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Lewis, D.: Counterfactuals. Basil Blackwell, London (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Moulin, H.: Axioms of Cooperative Decision Making. Wiley, New-York (1988)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1947)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Osgood, C.E., Suci, G.J., Tannenbaum, P.H.: The Measurement of Meaning. Univ. of Illinois Press, Chicago (1957)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Öztürk, M., Tsoukiàs, A.: Bipolar preference modeling and aggregation in decision support. Int. J. Intelligent Systems. 23(9), 970–984 (2008)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., MacGregor, D.G.: Rational actors or rational fools? implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics. The J. of Socio-Economics 31, 329–342 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 297–323 (1992)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Wald, A.: Statistical Decision Functions. Wiley, Chichester (1950)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Weng, P.: An axiomatic approach in qualitative decision theory with binary possibilistic utility. In: Proc. of the 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2006), Riva del Garda, Italy, pp. 467–471. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1, 1–28 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRIT, CNRS & Université de Toulouse, France

    Didier Dubois

  2. CNRS & Université de Toulouse, France

    Hélène Fargier

Authors
  1. Didier Dubois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hélène Fargier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Quantitative Methods, University of Catania, Corso Italia 55, 95129, Catania, Italy

    Salvatore Greco

  2. Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Via Inama 5, 38122, Trento, Italy

    Ricardo Alberto Marques Pereira

  3. Department of Economical and Social Sciences, University of Sannio at Benevento, Via delle Puglie, 82100, Benevento, Italy

    Massimo Squillante

  4. Machine Intelligence Institute, Iona College, 10801, New Rochelle, NY, USA

    Ronald R. Yager

  5. Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, ul. Newelska 6, 01–447, Warsaw, Poland

    Janusz Kacprzyk

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dubois, D., Fargier, H. (2010). Qualitative Bipolar Decision Rules: Toward More Expressive Settings. In: Greco, S., Marques Pereira, R.A., Squillante, M., Yager, R.R., Kacprzyk, J. (eds) Preferences and Decisions. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 257. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15976-3_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15976-3_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15975-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15976-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation