An ILOWG operator based group decision making method and its application to evaluate the supplier criteria

The aim of this work is to present some cases of the induced linguistic ordered weighted geometry (ILOWG) operators and study their desired properties, which are very suitable to deal with group decision making (GDM) problems involving multiplicative linguistic preference relations. First, the concepts of compatibility index (CI) for two multiplicative linguistic preference relations are defined. Then, we provide some ILOWG operators to aggregate multiplicative linguistic preference relations in GDM problems. In particular, we present the compatibility index ILOWG (CI-ILOWG) operator, which induces the order of argument values by utilizing the compatibility index of experts; and the importance ILOWG (I-ILOWG) operator, which induces the order of argument values based on the importance index of the experts. Next, the reciprocity, consistency and compatibility properties of the collective multiplicative linguistic preference relations obtained by these cases of ILOWG operators are verified. Finally, the aggregation of individual judgements (AIJ) and the aggregation of individual priorities (AIP) provide the same priorities of alternatives by utilizing the row geometric mean method (RGMM) as a prioritization procedure and the ILOWG operators as an aggregation procedure. Our results show that if all the individual decision makers have an acceptable consensus degree, then the collective preference relation is also of an acceptable consensus degree. Moreover, the compatibility index induced linguistic ordered weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix (CI-ILOWGCJM) guarantees that the group compatibility degree is at least as good as the arithmetic mean of all the individual compatibility degrees. Accordingly, a theoretic basis has been developed for the application of these cases of ILOWG operators in linguistic group decision making. Finally, a numerical example for evaluating criteria of supply selection is given to illustrate the application of the results.

[1]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A Consensus Model for Group Decision Making With Incomplete Fuzzy Preference Relations , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[2]  Hui Li,et al.  The induced continuous ordered weighted geometric operators and their application in group decision making , 2009, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[3]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  On Compatibility of Interval Fuzzy Preference Relations , 2004, Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak..

[4]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation , 1993 .

[5]  H. B. Mitchell,et al.  A generalized OWA operator , 1999 .

[6]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  The Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators: Theory and Applications , 1997 .

[7]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Leximin optimality and fuzzy set-theoretic operations , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[8]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic OWA operators , 1996, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[9]  D. Dubois,et al.  Beyond min aggregation in multicriteria decision: (ordered) weighted min, discri-min, leximin , 1997 .

[10]  T. Saaty.  A ratio scale metric and the compatibility of ratio scales: The possibility of arrow's impossibility theorem , 1994 .

[11]  Z. Xu,et al.  On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[12]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Including importances in OWA aggregations using fuzzy systems modeling , 1998, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst..

[13]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision-making , 1988 .

[14]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Fuzzy sets and decision analysis , 1997, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[15]  Jian Wu,et al.  An argument-dependent approach to determining OWA operator weights based on the rule of maximum entropy: Research Articles , 2007 .

[16]  Ying-Ming Wang,et al.  A preemptive goal programming method for aggregating OWA operator weights in group decision making , 2007, Inf. Sci..

[17]  Wang Lian,et al.  Compatibility and Group Decision Making , 2000 .

[18]  Isaac Plana,et al.  GRASP and path relinking for the matrix bandwidth minimization , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[20]  Z. S. Xu,et al.  An overview of operators for aggregating information , 2003, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[21]  Xinwang Liu,et al.  On the properties of parametric geometric OWA operator , 2004, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[22]  Gloria Bordogna,et al.  A linguistic modeling of consensus in group decision making based on OWA operators , 1997, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[23]  Z. S. Xu,et al.  Eowa And Eowg Operators For Aggregating Linguistic Labels Based On Linguistic Preference Relations , 2004, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

[24]  K. Arrow,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[25]  Janusz Kacprzyk,et al.  Computing with words in intelligent database querying: standalone and Internet-based applications , 2001, Inf. Sci..

[26]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  A note on AHP group consistency for the row geometric mean priorization procedure , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[27]  F. Herrera,et al.  An intelligent news recommender agent for filtering and categorizing large volumes of text corpus , 2004 .

[28]  Changyong Liang,et al.  An argument‐dependent approach to determining OWA operator weights based on the rule of maximum entropy , 2007, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[29]  D. Dubois,et al.  Social choice axioms for fuzzy set aggregation , 1991 .

[30]  V. Torra.  The weighted OWA operator , 1997, International Journal of Intelligent Systems.

[31]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  On generalized induced linguistic aggregation operators , 2006, Int. J. Gen. Syst..

[32]  Luis Martínez-López,et al.  A Consensus Support System Model for Group Decision-Making Problems With Multigranular Linguistic Preference Relations , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[33]  Yucheng Dong,et al.  On consistency of the weighted arithmetical mean complex judgement matrix * * This project was suppo , 2007 .

[34]  Dimitar Filev,et al.  Induced ordered weighted averaging operators , 1999, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[35]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Applications of the linguistic OWA operators in group decision making , 1997 .

[36]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  Group decision making and consensus under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority , 1992 .

[37]  J. Barzilai,et al.  Ahp Rank Reversal, Normalization and Aggregation Rules , 1994 .

[38]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[39]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Induced aggregation operators , 2003, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[40]  Janusz Kacprzyk,et al.  The Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators , 1997 .

[41]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[42]  Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson,et al.  Group decision-making and the analytic hierarchy process: Exploring the consensus-relevant information content , 1996, Comput. Oper. Res..