Decision making with intuitionistic linguistic preference relations

Meng, Fanyong; Tang, Jie; An, Qingxian; Chen, Xiaohong

doi:10.1111/itor.12383

Cited by 38 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(96 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is a relatively simple decision‐making method that only requires the DMs to compare two objects in each time. With the increasing complexity of decision‐making problems, several extended types of PRs are proposed (Meng & Tan, ; Meng, Tan, & Chen, ; Saaty & Vargas, ; Meng & Chen, ; van Laarhoven and Pedrycz, ; Meng, Tang, An, & Chen, ; Xu & Xia, ; Szmidt & Kacprzyk, ; Zhang & Guo, ). On the other hand, decision making with PRs has been applied in many fields, such as industry meteorological service (Gong, Li, Forrest, & Zhao, ), supply chain management (Meng, Tan, & Chen, ; Wang & Li, ), the fire system of a tank unit (Meng, Tan, & Chen, ; Xu, ), new product development project screening (Wang and Chen, ), and selection of the catering firm (Wang et al, ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative hesitant fuzzy group decision making: An additively consistent probability and consensus‐based perspective

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations (HFLPRs) can efficiently denote the hesitant qualitative judgments of decision makers. Consistency and consensus are two critical topics in group decision making (GDM) with preference relations. This paper uses the additively consistent concept for linguistic fuzzy preference relations (LFPRs) to give an additive consistency definition for HFLPRs. To judge the additive consistency of HFLPRs, 0‐1 mixed programming models (0‐1‐MPMs) are constructed. Meanwhile, additive‐consistency‐based 0‐1‐MPMs to ascertain missing values in incomplete HFLPRs are established. Following the consistent probability of LFPRs, an algorithm to calculate the linguistic priority weighting vector is presented. In consideration of the consensus of GDM, a consistency‐probability‐distance‐measure‐based consensus index is defined, and an interactive improving consensus method is provided. Finally, a method for GDM with HFLPRs is offered that can address incomplete and inconsistent cases. Meanwhile, numerical examples are offered, and comparative analysis is made.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Qualitative hesitant fuzzy group decision making: An additively consistent probability and consensus‐based perspective

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) ILPRs [55] In the beginning, SNLNs should be converted into intuitionistic linguistic numbers. The linguistic values can remain, 1 3 (T ij + 1 − I ij + 1 − F ij ) may be equivalent to u, and v = 1 − u.…”

Section: Comparison Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting Project Delivery Systems Based on Simplified Neutrosophic Linguistic Preference Relations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Project delivery system selection is an essential part of project management. In the process of choosing appropriate transaction model, many factors should be under consideration, such as the capability and experience of proprietors, project implementation risk, and so on. How to make their comprehensive evaluations and select the optimal delivery system? This paper proposes a decision-making approach based on an extended linguistic preference structure: simplified neutrosophic linguistic preference relations (SNLPRs). The basic elements in SNLPRs are simplified neutrosophic linguistic numbers (SNLNs). First, several distance measures of SNLNs are introduced. A distance-based consistency index is provided to measure the consistency degree of a simplified neutrosophic linguistic preference relation (SNLPR). When the SNLPR is not acceptably consistent, a consistency-improving automatic iterative algorithm may be used. Afterwards, a decision-making method with SNLPRs is developed. The example of its application in project delivery systems' selection is offered, and a comparison analysis is given in the end as well.

show abstract

“…Liu and Wang 6 proposed intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators and applied them to group decision making. Meng et al 7 introduced intuitionistic linguistic PRs and their application in decision making.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pythagorean linguistic preference relations and their applications to group decision making using group recommendations based on consistency matrices and feedback mechanism

Mandal

Samanta²,

Pal

et al. 2020

Int J Intell Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we introduce a new type of fuzzy set, called Pythagorean linguistic sets (PLSs), to address the preferred and nonpreferred degrees of linguistic variables. Moreover, it allows decision makers to offer effectively handle uncertain information more flexible than intuitionistic linguistic sets (ILSs) when one compares two alternatives in the process of decision making. Some of the fundamental operational laws, score, accuracy, and aggregation operators are defined, and their properties are investigated. Preference relation (PR) is a useful and efficient tool for decision making that only requires the decision makers to compare two alternatives at one time. Taking the advantages of PLSs and PRs, this paper also introduces Pythagorean linguistic preference relations (PLPRs) and studies their application. We propose an approach for group decision making using group recommendations based on consistency matrices and feedback mechanism. First, the proposed method constructs the collective consistency matrix, the weight collective PRs, and the group collective PRs. Then, it constructs a consensus relation for each expert and determines the group consensus degree (GCD) for all experts. If the GCD is smaller than a predefined threshold value, then a feedback mechanism is activated to update the PLPRs. Finally, after the GCD is greater than or equal to the predefined threshold value, we calculate the arithmetic mathematical average values of the updated group collective PR to select the most appropriate alternative.

show abstract

Decision making with intuitionistic linguistic preference relations

Cited by 38 publications

References 43 publications

Qualitative hesitant fuzzy group decision making: An additively consistent probability and consensus‐based perspective

Qualitative hesitant fuzzy group decision making: An additively consistent probability and consensus‐based perspective

Selecting Project Delivery Systems Based on Simplified Neutrosophic Linguistic Preference Relations

Pythagorean linguistic preference relations and their applications to group decision making using group recommendations based on consistency matrices and feedback mechanism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About