基于概率语言术语集的多属性环境下三支决策方法研究
Three-Way Decisions Approach to Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making with Probabilistic Linguistic Information
摘要: 相对于语言术语集,概率语言术语集要求决策者利用语言术语评价方案的同时,给出其对各语言术语的偏好,为后续的决策分析提供更多的判断信息。针对属性值为概率语言术语集的多属性决策问题,本文提出了基于三支决策的多属性群决策方法,在求得方案排序的同时给出每个方案应采取的行动策略。首先,为了确定属性权重及正、负理想解,构建了以决策者评价非一致度最小化为目标的优化模型;然后,基于求得的属性权重和正、负理想解,通过计算每个属性下各方案在不同状态下采取不同行动时的损失值,构建综合损失矩阵;最后,利用TOPSIS思想在根据相对贴近度对方案进行排序的同时确定各方案属于不同状态的条件概率,求得各方案采取不同行动的期望损失值,并以此为基础利用三支决策规则确定各方案应采取的行动策略。
Abstract: Compared with linguistic term set, the probabilistic linguistic term set (PLTS) allows the decision makers (DMs) to give the weight of each linguistic term as a probability, which is useful to DMs to provide their preference more completely and accurately. The aim of this paper is to propose a three-way decisions method for multiple attribute group decision making in which the DMs’ pref-erence over alternatives with respect to the given attribute is expressed by PLTSs. Firstly, a liner programming model aiming to minimize inconsistency index of all DMs is constructed to derive the weights of attributes and positive/negative ideal solution (PIS/NIS). Then, based on the obtained weights of attributes, PIS and NIS, the method to determine the collective loss matrix is proposed. Furthermore, the relative closeness degrees are calculated to estimate the conditional probabilities of each alternative under different states, while the ranking of alternatives is obtained. Finally, the expected loss values of each alternative adopting different actions are calculated, and thus according to the decision rule, the best action for each alternative is determined.
文章引用:郑晴, 刘小月. 基于概率语言术语集的多属性环境下三支决策方法研究[J]. 运筹与模糊学, 2019, 9(2): 203-214. https://doi.org/10.12677/ORF.2019.92023

参考文献

[1] Yao, Y.Y. and Wong, S.K. (1992) A Decision Theoretic Framework for Approximating Concepts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37, 793-809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[2] Pawlak, Z. (1982) Rough Set. International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, 11, 341-356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] 刘久兵, 顾萍萍, 周献中, 黄兵, 李华雄. 基于优化模型的直觉模糊三支群决策方法[J]. 南京大学学报(自然科学), 2018, 54(5): 944-957.
[4] 刘久兵, 张里博, 周献中, 黄兵, 李华雄. 直觉模糊信息系统下的三支决策模型[J]. 小型微型计算机系统, 2018, 39(6): 163-167.
[5] Liang, D., Xu, Z. and Liu, D. (2017) Three-Way Decisions Based-Theoretic Rough Sets with Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Information. Infor-mation Sciences, 396, 127-143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] Jia, F. and Liu, P. (2019) A Novel Three-Way Decision Model under Multiple-Criteria Environment.
[7] Liang, D., Xu, Z., Liu, D. and Wu, Y. (2018) Method for Three-Way Decisions Using Ideal TOPSIS Solutions at Pythagorean Fuzzy Information. Information Sci-ences, 435, 282-295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Rdriguez, R.M., Martinez, L. and Herrera, F. (2012) Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 20, 109-119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[9] Pang, Q., Wang, H. and Xu, Z. (2016) Probabilistic Linguistic Term Sets in Multi-Attribute Group Decision Making. Information Sciences, 369, 128-143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[10] Gou, X. and Xu, Z. (2016) Novel Basic Operational Laws for Lin-guistic Terms, Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets and Probabilistic Linguistic Term Sets. Elsevier Science Inc., New York. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Bai, C., Zhang, R., Qian, L., et al. (2017) Comparisons of Probabilistic Linguistic Term Sets for Multi-Criteria Decision Making. Knowledge-Based Systems, 119, 284-291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Liao, H., Jiang, L., Xu, Z., Xu, J. and Herrera, F. (2017) A Linear Programming Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making with Probabilistic Linguistic Information. Infor-mation Sciences, 415-416, 341-355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Xu, Z. (2005) Deviation Measures of Linguistic Preference Relations in Group Decision Making. Omega, 33, 249-254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] Zadeh, L.A. (1975) The Concept of a Linguistic Variable and Its Application to Approximate Reasoning I. Information Sciences, 8, 199-249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[15] Bai, C.Z., Zhang, R., Shen, S., Huang, C.F. and Fan, X. (2018) Interval-Valued Probabilistic Linguistic Term Sets in Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 33, No. 6.
[16] Xia, M. and Xu, Z. (2011) Hesitant Fuzzy Information Aggregation in Decision Making. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 52, 395-407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] Srinivasan, V. and Shocker, A.D. (1973) Linear Programming Techniques for Multidimensional Analysis of Preferences. Psychometrika, 38, 337-342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[18] Li, H.X. and Zhou, X.Z. (2011) Risk Decision Making Based on Deci-sion-Theoretic Rough Set: A Three-Way View Decision Model. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 4, 1-11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981) Multiple Attribute Deci-sion Making: Methods and Applications. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems Vol. 375, 1-531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[20] 曾守桢, 穆志民. 基于混合加权距离的毕达哥拉斯模糊TOPSIS多属性决策方法研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(3): 198-205.