Decision Support The evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainty

The evidential reasoning (ER) approach is a method for multiple attribute decision analysis (MADA) under uncertainties. It improves the insightfulness and rationality of a decision making process by using a belief decision matrix (BDM) for problem modelling and the Dempster–Shafer (D–S) theory of evidence for attribute aggregation. The D– S theory provides scope and flexibility to deal with interval uncertainties or local ignorance in decision analysis, which is not explored in the original ER approach and will be investigated in this paper. Firstly, interval uncertainty will be defined and modelled in the ER framework. Then, an extended ER algorithm, IER, is derived, which enables the ER approach to deal with interval uncertainty in assessing alternatives on an attribute. It is proved that the original ER algorithm is a special case of the IER algorithm. The latter is demonstrated using numerical examples. � 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

[1]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning Approach-RIMER , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[4]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Interval weight generation approaches based on consistency test and interval comparison matrices , 2005, Appl. Math. Comput..

[5]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A preference aggregation method through the estimation of utility intervals , 2005, Comput. Oper. Res..

[6]  Malcolm J. Beynon,et al.  A method of aggregation in DS/AHP for group decision-making with the non-equivalent importance of individuals in the group , 2005, Comput. Oper. Res..

[7]  Reza Farzipoor Saen,et al.  Determining relative efficiency of slightly non-homogeneous decision making units by data envelopment analysis: a case study in IROST , 2005, Appl. Math. Comput..

[8]  Malcolm J. Beynon,et al.  Understanding local ignorance and non-specificity within the DS/AHP method of multi-criteria decision making , 2005, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A two-stage logarithmic goal programming method for generating weights from interval comparison matrices , 2005, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[10]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Fuzzy Rule-Based Evidential Reasoning Approach for Safety Analysis , 2004, Int. J. Gen. Syst..

[11]  Alan Olinsky,et al.  The comparative efficacy of imputation methods for missing data in structural equation modeling , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[12]  M. Beynon.  An investigation of the role of scale values in the DS/AHP method of multi-criteria decision making , 2002 .

[13]  Ludmil Mikhailov,et al.  Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises , 2002 .

[14]  Malcolm J. Beynon,et al.  DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[16]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Nonlinear information aggregation via evidential reasoning in multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainty , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[17]  P. Patrician.  Multiple imputation for missing data. , 2002, Research in nursing & health.

[18]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[19]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Addressing the contractor selection problem using an evidential reasoning approach , 2001 .

[20]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[21]  Malcolm J. Beynon,et al.  An expert system for multi-criteria decision making using Dempster Shafer theory , 2001, Expert Syst. Appl..

[22]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Self-assessment of excellence: An application of the evidential reasoning approach , 2001 .

[23]  B. G. Dale,et al.  A New Modeling Framework for Organizational Self-Assessment: Development and Application , 2001 .

[24]  Chiang Kao,et al.  Data envelopment analysis with missing data: an application to University libraries in Taiwan , 2000, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[25]  M. Beynon,et al.  The Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence: an alternative approach to multicriteria decision modelling , 2000 .

[26]  Linda M. Haines,et al.  A statistical approach to the analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements. (I). Distributions on feasible regions , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[27]  S. H. Zanakis,et al.  A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP , 1997 .

[28]  Liang-Hsuan Chen,et al.  An Extended Rule-Based Inference for General Decision-Making Problems , 1997, Inf. Sci..

[29]  Jin Wang,et al.  A subjective methodology for safety analysis of safety requirements specifications , 1997, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst..

[30]  Mathias Bauer,et al.  Approximation algorithms and decision making in the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence - An empirical study , 1997, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[31]  M. P. Biswal,et al.  Preference programming and inconsistent interval judgments , 1997 .

[32]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Multi-person and multi-attribute design evaluations using evidential reasoning based on subjective safety and cost analyses , 1996 .

[33]  R. Hämäläinen,et al.  Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons , 1995 .

[34]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A General Multi-Level Evaluation Process for Hybrid MADM With Uncertainty , 1994, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst..

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

[36]  A. E. Hoerl,et al.  An incomplete design in the analytic hierarchy process , 1992 .

[37]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Decision Making Under Dempster-Shafer Uncertainties , 1992, Classic Works of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Belief Functions.

[38]  Moshe Kress,et al.  Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation — a comment , 1991 .

[39]  Ami Arbel,et al.  Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation , 1989 .

[40]  John Yen,et al.  GERTIS: a Dempster-Shafer approach to diagnosing hierarchical hypotheses , 1989, CACM.

[41]  T. Saaty.  Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2005 .

[42]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .

[43]  J. Siskos.  Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making , 1982 .

[44]  Lawrence D. Phillips,et al.  Requisite Decision Modelling: A Case Study , 1982 .

[45]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Intelligent Decision System for Supplier Assessment , 2004 .

[46]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Intelligent decision system for self‐assessment , 2003 .

[47]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Nonlinear Regression to Estimate Both Weights and Utilities Via Evidential Reasoning for MADM , 2001 .

[48]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A Subjective Safety-based Decision-making Approach for Evaluation of Safety Requirements Specifications in Software Development , 2001 .

[49]  Simon French,et al.  Uncertainty and Imprecision: Modelling and Analysis , 1995 .

[50]  Pratyush Sen,et al.  Multiple-criteria Decision-making in Design Selection and Synthesis , 1995 .

[51]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Safety analysis and synthesis using fuzzy sets and evidential reasoning , 1995 .

[52]  M. Singh,et al.  An Evidential Reasoning Approach for Multiple-Attribute Decision Making with Uncertainty , 1994, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst..

[53]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  Advances in the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence , 1994 .

[54]  P. Harker.  Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .