Prospect theory-based large-scale group decision-making method with heterogeneous preference relations

被引:1
|
作者
Gong, Kaixin [1 ]
Ma, Weimin [1 ]
Ren, Zitong [1 ]
Wang, Jia [1 ]
机构
[1] Tongji Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Shanghai 200092, Peoples R China
关键词
Large-scale group decision-making; prospect theory; heterogeneous preference relations; consensus reaching; risk attitudes; PERSONALIZED INDIVIDUAL SEMANTICS; CONSENSUS MODEL; NONCOOPERATIVE BEHAVIORS; PREFABRICATION; INFORMATION;
D O I
10.3233/JIFS-231456
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Large-scale group decision-making (LSGDM) issues are increasingly prevalent in modern society across various domains. The preference information has emerged as a widely adopted approach to tackle LSGDM problems. However, a significant challenge lies in facilitating consensus among decision-makers (DMs) with diverse backgrounds while considering their hesitation and psychological behavior. Consequently, there is a pressing need to establish a novel model that enables DMs to evaluate alternatives with heterogeneous preference relations (HPRs). To this end, this research presents a new consensus-building method to address LSGDM problems with HPRs. First, a novel approach for solving collective priority weight is introduced based on cosine similarity and prospect theory. In particular, a new cosine similarity measure is defined for HPRs. Subsequently, a consensus index is provided to gauge the consensus level among DMs by considering their psychological behavior and risk attitudes. Further, a consensus-reaching model is developed to address LSGDM with HPRs. Finally, an instance of supplier selection is presented to demonstrate the practicality and efficacy of the proposed method.
引用
收藏
页码:11549 / 11566
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Emergency decision-making combining cumulative prospect theory and group decision-making
    Wenjing Liu
    Lei Li
    Granular Computing, 2019, 4 : 39 - 52
  • [32] Social network community analysis based large-scale group decision making approach with incomplete fuzzy preference relations
    Chu, Junfeng
    Wang, Yingming
    Liu, Xinwang
    Liu, Yicong
    INFORMATION FUSION, 2020, 60 : 98 - 120
  • [33] A decision-making method for outpatient appointment based on prospect theory
    Li, Ming-Yang, 1801, Northeast University (35):
  • [34] A method based on trust model for large group decision-making with incomplete preference information
    Xu, Xuanhua
    Wang, Bing
    Zhou, Yanju
    JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT & FUZZY SYSTEMS, 2016, 30 (06) : 3551 - 3565
  • [35] New Fuzzy Preference Relations for Group Decision-Making
    Zamali, T.
    Norfazillah, M.
    Abu Osman, A. T.
    Lazim, M. A.
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES AND STATISTICS 2013 (ICMSS2013), 2013, 1557 : 72 - 77
  • [36] Group decision-making with interval multiplicative preference relations
    Wan, Shuping
    Cheng, Xianjuan
    Dong, Jiuying
    KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 2023, 65 (05) : 2305 - 2346
  • [37] Group decision-making with interval multiplicative preference relations
    Shuping Wan
    Xianjuan Cheng
    Jiuying Dong
    Knowledge and Information Systems, 2023, 65 : 2305 - 2346
  • [38] A decentralized feedback-based consensus model considering the consistency maintenance and readability of probabilistic linguistic preference relations for large-scale group decision-making
    Zhang, Xian-Yong
    Zhou, Yi-Yang
    Zhou, Jian-Lan
    COMPLEX & INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS, 2025, 11 (01)
  • [39] Social network clustering and consensus-based distrust behaviors management for large-scale group decision-making with incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations
    Lu, Yanling
    Xu, Yejun
    Huang, Jing
    Wei, Ju
    Herrera-Viedma, Enrique
    APPLIED SOFT COMPUTING, 2022, 117
  • [40] A dynamic trust network and influence measure-based consensus model for large-scale group decision-making with incomplete intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations
    Gong, Kaixin
    Ma, Weimin
    Lei, Wenjing
    Goh, Mark
    JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2024, 75 (06) : 1157 - 1177