Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making

被引:219
作者
Dong, Yucheng [1 ]
Liu, Yating [1 ]
Liang, Haiming [1 ]
Chiclana, Francisco [2 ]
Herrera-Viedma, Enrique [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, Business Sch, Chengdu 610065, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[2] De Montfort Univ, Fac Technol, Ctr Computat Intelligence, Leicester, Leics, England
[3] Univ Granada, Dept Comp Sci & Artificial Intelligence, Granada, Spain
[4] King Abdulaziz Univ, Fac Engn, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
来源
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE | 2018年 / 75卷
关键词
Multiple attribute decision making; Strategic weight manipulation; Average; Ranking; LINGUISTIC INFORMATION; INCOMPLETE INFORMATION; PREFERENCE RELATIONS; CONSENSUS MODEL; SOCIAL NETWORK; APPROXIMATION; SUPPORT;
D O I
10.1016/j.omega.2017.02.008
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In some real-world multiple attribute decision making (MADM) problems, a decision maker can strategically set attribute weights to obtain her/his desired ranking of alternatives, which we call the strategic weight manipulation of the MADM. In this paper, we define the concept of the ranking range of an alternative in the MADM, and propose a series of mixed 0-1 linear programming models (MLPMs) to show the process of designing a strategic attribute weight vector. Then, we reveal the conditions to manipulate a strategic attribute weight based on the ranking range and the proposed MLPMs. Finally, a numerical example with real background is used to demonstrate the validity of our models, and simulation experiments are presented to show the better performance of the ordered weighted averaging operator than the weighted averaging operator in defending against the strategic weight manipulation of the MADM problems. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:154 / 164
页数:11
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
[2]   A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation [J].
Bana E Costa, Carlos A. ;
Oliveira, Monica D. .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2012, 40 (04) :424-436
[3]   Decision quality using ranked attribute weights [J].
Barron, FH ;
Barrett, BE .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1996, 42 (11) :1515-1523
[4]   A comparison of three weight elicitation methods: good, better, and best [J].
Bottomley, PA ;
Doyle, JR .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2001, 29 (06) :553-560
[5]   MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION-MAKING UNITS [J].
CHARNES, A ;
COOPER, WW ;
RHODES, E .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1978, 2 (06) :429-444
[6]   A DATA ENVELOPMENT MODEL FOR AGGREGATING PREFERENCE RANKINGS [J].
COOK, WD ;
KRESS, M .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1990, 36 (11) :1302-1310
[7]   Augmenting Ordinal Methods of Attribute Weight Approximation [J].
Danielson, Mats ;
Ekenberg, Love ;
He, Ying .
DECISION ANALYSIS, 2014, 11 (01) :21-26
[8]   Consensus reaching model in the complex and dynamic MAGDM problem [J].
Dong, Yucheng ;
Zhang, Hengjie ;
Herrera-Viedma, Enrique .
KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS, 2016, 106 :206-219
[9]   Integrating experts' weights generated dynamically into the consensus reaching process and its applications in managing non-cooperative behaviors [J].
Dong, Yucheng ;
Zhang, Hengjie ;
Herrera-Viedma, Enrique .
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2016, 84 :1-15
[10]   Judging relative importance: Direct rating and point allocation are not equivalent [J].
Doyle, JR ;
Green, RH ;
Bottomley, PA .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1997, 70 (01) :65-72