Group Decision Making in a Bipolar Leveled Framework

We study the use of a bipolar decision structure called BLF (bipolar leveled framework) in the context of collective decision making where the vote consists in giving factual information about a candidate which the group should accept or reject. A BLF defines the set of possible decision principles that may be used in order to evaluate the admissibility of a given candidate. A decision principle is a rule that relates some observations about the candidate to a given goal that the selection of this candidate may achieve or miss. The decision principles are ordered accordingly to the importance of the goal they support. Oppositions to decision principles are also described in the BLF under the form of observations that contradict the realization of the decision principles. We show how the use of a common BLF may reduce the impact of manipulation strategies in the context of group decision making.

[1]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices under Uncertainty , 1971 .

[2]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates. , 1994 .

[3]  Henri Prade,et al.  Comparing decisions on the basis of a bipolar typology of arguments , 2008 .

[4]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Qualitative Heuristics For Balancing the Pros and Cons , 2008 .

[5]  Blai Bonet,et al.  Arguing for Decisions: A Qualitative Model of Decision Making , 1996, UAI.

[6]  Colleen Crum,et al.  Supply Chain Collaboration: How to Implement CPFR and Other Best Collaborative Practices , 2005 .

[7]  Romain Guillaume,et al.  Analyzing a Bipolar Decision Structure Through Qualitative Decision Theory , 2017, KI - Künstliche Intelligenz.

[8]  Bernard Grabot,et al.  Robust competence assessment for job assignment , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Amnon Rapoport,et al.  Sequential search by groups with rank-dependent payoffs: An experimental study , 2014 .

[10]  D. Dubois,et al.  An overview of bipolar qualitative decision rules , 2008 .

[11]  Marie-Christine Lagasquie-Schiex,et al.  A Constrained Argumentation System for Practical Reasoning , 2008, ArgMAS.

[12]  Romain Guillaume,et al.  Towards a Transparent Deliberation Protocol Inspired from Supply Chain Collaborative Planning , 2014, IPMU.

[13]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Qualitative Bipolar Decision Rules: Toward More Expressive Settings , 2010, Preferences and Decisions.

[14]  Nahla Ben Amor,et al.  Solving Multi-criteria Decision Problems under Possibilistic Uncertainty Using Optimistic and Pessimistic Utilities , 2014, IPMU.

[15]  Michael Wooldridge,et al.  Reasoning about rational agents , 2000, Intelligent robots and autonomous agents.

[16]  Didier Dubois,et al.  On the Qualitative Comparison of Decisions Having Positive and Negative Features , 2008, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[17]  Nahla Ben Amor,et al.  Egalitarian Collective Decision Making under Qualitative Possibilistic Uncertainty: Principles and Characterization , 2015, AAAI.

[18]  Howard Raiffa,et al.  Decision analysis: introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. 1968. , 1969, M.D.Computing.