Paraconsistent Logic in Decision Making: Paraconsistent Decision Method (PDM)

Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating cancer treatments in hospital-based health technology assessment: The Paraconsistent Value Framework

“…Once this basic principle is met, when applying a paraconsistent framework for decision-making, one should set up the level of the requirement (control level) for the decision to be made that depends on the level of safety desired for the decision as well as the responsibility it entails [ 40 ]. These requirements establish the likelihood that a relationship observed between variables is due to chance (similar to a probability of a type-1 error in statistics).…”

“…Once all invited experts assign scores for ranges of performance in each criterion (using de bi-annotated procedure) and weights to all criteria considered, the final global value score is calculated as the arithmetic means of the weights assigned by the experts [ 18 ]. Then, maximization rules (MAX operator) are applied within the groups of experts (intra-groups), and minimization rules (MIN operator) are applied in the groups of experts (between groups) [ 40 ]. The MAX operator should be applied to situations in which the favorable opinion of just one of them is enough to consider the group result as satisfactory.…”

“…The MAX operator should be applied to situations in which the favorable opinion of just one of them is enough to consider the group result as satisfactory. The MIN operator should be applied to situations where the opinions of two or more experts (or surveyed items) are all determinant, and it must be mandatory that all are favorable so that the result of the analysis is considered satisfactory [ 38 , 40 ]. This way of applying the rules of maximization and minimization for decision-making is known as the min/max principle or optimistic decision because it minimizes the higher degree of certainty [ 40 ].…”

“…Therefore, these two extreme states are indicative of the need for model revision, either in relation to the value criteria or evidence considered (state T), either in relation to the participating specialists or even in relation to the way in which they were distributed in the groups (state ⊥). Details on the lattice-based interpretation of para-analysis can be found elsewhere [ 37 , 38 , 40 , 41 ] and in ( S1 File ). When the resultant fall in the other regions, inside the borders of the lattice, the resulting states are said to be non-extreme and correspond to undefined situations.…”

“…Thus, a language that can manipulate such inconsistencies and make sensible inferences is often needed. The Logic Eτ can be used in this purpose, in order to aggregate value judgments, even if they are contradictory [ 40 ].…”