基于证据推理和广义Shapley值的扩展概率语言多属性群决策方法

doi:10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2020.11.021

中国管理科学 ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (11): 206-218.doi: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2020.11.021

基于证据推理和广义Shapley值的扩展概率语言多属性群决策方法

刘培德^1,2, 滕飞²

1. 中国民航大学经济与管理学院, 天津 300300;
2. 山东财经大学管理科学与工程学院, 山东济南 250014

收稿日期:2019-04-01 修回日期:2019-12-05 出版日期:2020-11-20 发布日期:2020-12-01
通讯作者: 刘培德(1966-),男(汉族),山东潍坊人,中国民航大学经济与管理学院,教授,博导,博士,研究方向:决策理论与优化方法,E-mail:peide.liu@gmail.com. E-mail:peide.liu@gmail.com.
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目（71771140，71471172，71801142）；山东省泰山学者工程专项经费资助项目（ts201511045）

Multiple Attribute Group Decision-Making Method Based on Evidential Reasoning and Generalized Shapley for Extended Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set

LIU Pei-de^1,2, TENG Fei²

1. School of Economics and Management, Civil Aviation University of China, Tianjin 300300, China;
2. School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economic, Jinan 250014, China

Received:2019-04-01 Revised:2019-12-05 Online:2020-11-20 Published:2020-12-01

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 扩展概率语言词集通过语言变量概率分布的调整能够转化为多种语言信息表示模型，是语言变量、不确定语言信息、扩展犹豫模糊语言词集、分布语言评估信息、概率语言词集等的一般化，具有较强的通用性和实用性，是处理不确定性信息的重要工具。鉴于此，本文针对扩展概率语言环境下的多属性群决策问题，提出基于证据推理和广义Shapley值的多属性群决策方法。首先，提出扩展概率语言词集的定义和相关基础理论。其次，将广义Shapley值和证据推理相结合用于专家信息融合，并将广义Shapley值和TODIM方法相结合用于备选方案排序。再次，提出基于灰色关联法的权重确定模型来处理专家/属性权重部分未知的情况。最后，以绿色供应商选择为例进行分析，通过对比分析验证所提方法的有效性和优越性。

关键词: 多属性群决策, 扩展概率语言词集, 证据推理, TODIM方法, 广义Shapley值

Abstract: Extended probabilistic linguistic term set (EPLTS) can be transformed into several linguistic information representation models by adjusting the probability distribution, such as uncertain linguistic variable, linguistic distribution assessment, extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set, probabilistic linguistic term set and so on. EPLTS can describe the original evaluation information more fully and objectively so that it is an important tool for dealing with uncertain information. In view of this, with respect to multiple attribute group decision making problems under extended probabilistic linguistic environment, this paper proposes an extended probabilistic linguistic group decision making method based on evidential reasoning and generalized Shapley value. Firstly, the concept and relative theories of extended probabilistic linguistic term set are given. Secondly, the combination of generalized Shapley value and evidential reasoning is used to aggregate evaluation information from multiple decision makers, and the combination of generalized Shapley value and classical TODIM method is utilized to rank multiple alternatives. Thirdly, the weight determination models based on grey relational method are proposed to calculate weights of decision makers and weights of attributes respectively. Finally, taking the green supplier selection as an example, the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed method are verified by comparative analysis with the existing methods.

Key words: multiple attribute group decision making, extended probabilistic linguistic term set, evidential reasoning, TODIM method, generalized Shapley value

中图分类号:

C934

刘培德, 滕飞. 基于证据推理和广义Shapley值的扩展概率语言多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(11): 206-218.

LIU Pei-de, TENG Fei. Multiple Attribute Group Decision-Making Method Based on Evidential Reasoning and Generalized Shapley for Extended Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2020, 28(11): 206-218.

参考文献

[1] Wang Hai. Extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their aggregation in group decision making[J]. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 2015, 8(1):14-33.
[2] Zhang Guiqing, Dong Yucheng, Xu Yinfeng. Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments[J]. Information Fusion, 2014, 17:46-55.
[3] Chen Zhensong, Chin Kwai-sang, Li Yanlan, et al. Proportional hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set for multiple criteria group decision making[J]. Information Sciences, 2016, 357:61-87.
[4] Pang Qi, Wang Hai, Xu Zeshui. Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making[J]. Information Sciences, 2016, 369:128-143.
[5] Dempster A P. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping[J]. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1967, 38(2):325-339.
[6] Shafer G. A mathematical theory of evidence[M]. Princeton:Princeton university press, 1976:35-57.
[7] 杜元伟,杨娜.大数据环境下双层分布式融合决策方法[J].中国管理科学,2016,24(5):127-138.
[8] 朱建军,王翯华,胡宏宇,刘思峰.群决策中指标冲突问题的证据推理决策模型[J].中国管理科学,2012,20(S1):101-107.
[9] Gomes L, Lima M. TODIM:Basics and application to multicriteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts[J]. Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences, 1992, 16(4):113-127.
[10] Sugeno M. Theory of fuzzy integrals and its applications[D]. Tokyo:Tokyo Institute of Technology, 1974.
[11] Marichal J L. An axiomatic approach of the discrete Choquet integral as a tool to aggregate interacting criteria[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2000, 8(6):800-807.
[12] Grabisch M, Kojadinovic I, Meyer P. A review of methods for capacity identification in Choquet integral based multi-attribute utility theory:Applications of the Kappalab R package[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2008, 186(2):766-785.
[13] Grabisch M. Fuzzy integral in multicriteria decision making[J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1995, 69(3):279-298.
[14] Grabisch M. The application of fuzzy integrals in multicriteria decision making[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1996, 89(3):445-456.
[15] Yang Jianbo, Sen P. A general multi-level evaluation process for hybrid MADM with uncertainty[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1994, 24(10):1458-1473.
[16] Yang Jianbo, Sen P. Evidential reasoning based hierarchical analysis for design selection of ship retro-fit options[M]//Artificial Intelligence in Design'94. The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.
[17] Yang Jianbo, Wang Yingming, Xu Dongling, et al. The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 171(1):309-343.
[18] Kahneman D, Tversky A. Prospect theory:An analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47:363-391.
[19] Liu Peide, You Xinli. Probabilistic linguistic TODIM approach for multiple attribute decision-making[J]. Granular Computing, 2017, 2(4):333-342.
[20] Zhang Xiaolu. A novel probabilistic linguistic approach for large-scale group decision making with incomplete weight information[J]. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2017:1-12.

基于证据推理和广义Shapley值的扩展概率语言多属性群决策方法

Multiple Attribute Group Decision-Making Method Based on Evidential Reasoning and Generalized Shapley for Extended Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	刘培德, 滕飞. 基于共识模型和ORESTE的扩展概率语言多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2021, 29(3): 199-209.
[2]	任嵘嵘, 孟一鸣, 李晓奇, 赵萌. 基于一致性度量的概率模糊语言多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(4): 220-230.
[3]	赵萌, 张晨曦, 胡亦奇, 李刚. 基于愿景满意度函数的多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(2): 220-230.
[4]	罗世华, 刘俊. 改进排序的梯形直觉模糊Choquet Bonferroni算子的多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2020, 28(1): 134-143.
[5]	刘东海, 刘原园, 陈晓红. 基于犹豫直觉模糊语言集均值-标准差偏好距离的多属性决策研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2019, 27(1): 174-183.
[6]	许成磊, 段万春, 孙永河. 多属性群决策的混合结构偏好识别与融合方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(8): 139-145.
[7]	朱卫东, 刘芳, 王东鹏, Jian-Bo Yang. 科学基金项目立项评估:综合评价信息可靠性的多指标证据推理规则研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(10): 141-148.
[8]	彭勃, 叶春明. 基于不确定纯语言混合调和平均算子的多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(2): 131-138.
[9]	万树平, 李登峰. 具有不同类型信息的风险投资商与投资企业多指标双边匹配决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(2): 40-47.
[10]	刘德海, 于倩, 马晓南, 尹丹, 王维国. 基于最小偏差组合权重的突发事件应急能力评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(11): 79-86.
[11]	刘德海, 于倩, 马晓南, 尹丹, 王维国. 基于最小偏差组合权重的突发事件应急能力评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(11): 79-86.
[12]	丁勇, 梁昌勇, 朱俊红, 陆文星. 群决策中基于二元语义的主客观权重集成方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2010, 18(5): 165-170.
[13]	梁昌勇, 张恩桥, 戚筱雯, 陆青. 一种评价信息不完全的混合型多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2009, 17(4): 126-132.
[14]	龚本刚, 华中生, 檀大水. 一种语言评价信息不完全的多属性群决策方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2007, 15(1): 88-93.
[15]	王坚强, 孙超. 不完全确定信息的群体语言指派问题的求解方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2007, 15(1): 74-79.