IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i12p2198-d459792.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Consensus Model for Extended Comparative Linguistic Expressions with Symbolic Translation

Author

Listed:
  • Álvaro Labella

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Rosa M. Rodríguez

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Ahmad A. Alzahrani

    (Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

  • Luis Martínez

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Jaén, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

Abstract

Consensus Reaching Process (CRP) is a necessary process to achieve agreed solutions in group decision making (GDM) problems. Usually, these problems are defined in uncertain contexts, in which experts do not have a full and precise knowledge about all aspects of the problem. In real-world GDM problems under uncertainty, it is usual that experts express their preferences by using linguistic expressions. Consequently, different methodologies have modelled linguistic information, in which computing with words stands out and whose basis is the fuzzy linguistic approach and their extensions. Even though, multiple consensus approaches under fuzzy linguistic environments have been proposed in the specialized literature, there are still some areas where their performance must be improved because of several persistent drawbacks. The drawbacks include the use of single linguistic terms that are not always enough to model the uncertainty in experts’ knowledge or the oversimplification of fuzzy information during the computational processes by defuzzification processes into crisp values, which usually implies a loss of information and precision in the results and also a lack of interpretability. Therefore, to improving the effects of previous drawbacks, this paper aims at presenting a novel CRP for GDM problems dealing with Extended Comparative Linguistic Expressions with Symbolic Translation (ELICIT) for modelling experts’ linguistic preferences. Such a CRP will overcome previous limitations because ELICIT information allows both fuzzy modelling of the experts’ uncertainty including hesitancy and performs comprehensive fuzzy computations to, ultimately, obtain precise and understandable linguistic results. Additionally, the proposed CRP model is implemented and integrated into the CRP support system so-called A FRamework for the analYsis of Consensus Approaches (AFRYCA) 3.0 that facilitates the application of the proposed CRP and its comparison with previous models.

Suggested Citation

  • Álvaro Labella & Rosa M. Rodríguez & Ahmad A. Alzahrani & Luis Martínez, 2020. "A Consensus Model for Extended Comparative Linguistic Expressions with Symbolic Translation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-22, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:12:p:2198-:d:459792
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/12/2198/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/12/2198/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jie Lu & Guangquan Zhang & Da Ruan & Fengjie Wu, 2007. "Multi-Objective Group Decision Making:Methods, Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques(With CD-ROM)," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number p505, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiao Tan & Jianjun Zhu & Tong Wu, 2022. "Dynamic Reference Point-Oriented Consensus Mechanism in Linguistic Distribution Group Decision Making Restricted by Quantum Integration of Information," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 491-528, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Branimir Stanić & Vladan Tubić & Nikola Čelar, 2011. "Design and evaluation of a grade-separated intersection: a case study of the proposed Belgrade ‘Hipodrom’," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6), pages 625-636, June.
    2. Farhad Shams & Sherif Mohamed & Aminah Robinson Fayek, 2014. "Improving Consistency Evaluation In Fuzzy Multi-Attribute Pairwise Comparison-Based Decision-Making Methods," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 31(04), pages 1-23.
    3. Jie Lu & Chenggen Shi & Guangquan Zhang & Da Ruan, 2007. "An Extended Branch And Bound Algorithm For Bilevel Multi-Follower Decision Making In A Referential-Uncooperative Situation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(02), pages 371-388.
    4. Liu, Fang & Chen, Ya-Ru & Zhou, Da-Hai, 2023. "A two-dimensional approach to flexibility degree of XOR numbers with application to group decision making," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 267-287.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:12:p:2198-:d:459792. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.