IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v33y2024i5d10.1007_s10726-024-09876-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Markov Chain-Based Group Consensus Method with Unknown Parameters

Author

Listed:
  • Chao Fu

    (Hefei University of Technology
    Key Laboratory of Process Optimization and Intelligent Decision-Making, Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Decision-Making & Information System Technologies)

  • Wenjun Chang

    (Hefei University of Technology
    Key Laboratory of Process Optimization and Intelligent Decision-Making, Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Decision-Making & Information System Technologies)

Abstract

Group consensus (GC) is important for generating a group solution satisfactory or acceptable to most decision-makers in a group. Its convergency usually depends on several rounds of iterations and becomes more difficult with unknown parameters because GC is usually associated with parameters. To address the GC with unknown parameters, this paper proposes a Markov chain-based GC method, in which criterion weights and expert weights are considered as parameters. Given the interval-valued assessments of decision-makers, the GC at the alternative and global levels is defined. Based on the Markov chain, a two-hierarchical randomization algorithm is designed with unknown criterion weights to determine the transition probability matrix used to generate the stable GC. To accelerate the stable GC’s convergency, criteria significantly contributing negatives to the stable GC are identified and suggestions on helping renew decision-makers’ assessments on the identified criteria are provided. On the condition that the stable GC is definitely satisfied, a GC-based two-hierarchical randomization algorithm is designed based on the Markov chain to determine the transition probability matrix for generating the stable ranking value distribution of each alternative. The proposed method is employed to analyze a development mode selection problem. It is compared with the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis and simple additive weighting methods based on the problem by calculation and principle.

Suggested Citation

  • Chao Fu & Wenjun Chang, 2024. "A Markov Chain-Based Group Consensus Method with Unknown Parameters," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1019-1048, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:33:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-024-09876-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-024-09876-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-024-09876-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-024-09876-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "A peer-to-peer dynamic adaptive consensus reaching model for the group AHP decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 521-530.
    2. Huizhang Shen & Jidi Zhao & Wayne W. Huang, 2008. "Mission-Critical Group Decision-Making: Solving the Problem of Decision Preference Change in Group Decision-Making Using markov Chain Model," Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), IGI Global, vol. 16(2), pages 35-57, April.
    3. Yazidi, Anis & Ivanovska, Magdalena & Zennaro, Fabio M. & Lind, Pedro G. & Viedma, Enrique Herrera, 2022. "A new decision making model based on Rank Centrality for GDM with fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(3), pages 1030-1041.
    4. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shanlin, 2012. "An evidential reasoning based consensus model for multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with interval-valued group consensus requirements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 167-176.
    5. Fu, Chao & Yang, Jian-Bo & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2015. "A group evidential reasoning approach based on expert reliability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 886-893.
    6. Xue, Min & Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2020. "Group consensus reaching based on a combination of expert weight and expert reliability," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    7. Duncan Black, 1976. "Partial justification of the Borda count," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Meng, Fan-Yong & Gong, Zai-Wu & Pedrycz, Witold & Chu, Jun-Fei, 2023. "Selfish-dilemma consensus analysis for group decision making in the perspective of cooperative game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 290-305.
    9. Du, Junliang & Liu, Sifeng & Liu, Yong, 2022. "A limited cost consensus approach with fairness concern and its application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 261-275.
    10. Fu, Chao & Chang, Wenjun & Xue, Min & Yang, Shanlin, 2019. "Multiple criteria group decision making with belief distributions and distributed preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(2), pages 623-633.
    11. Baumann, Hendrik & Sandmann, Werner, 2017. "Multi-server tandem queue with Markovian arrival process, phase-type service times, and finite buffers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(1), pages 187-195.
    12. Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2001. "SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 444-454, June.
    13. Fu, Chao & Yang, Shanlin, 2011. "An attribute weight based feedback model for multiple attributive group decision analysis problems with group consensus requirements in evidential reasoning context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(1), pages 179-189, July.
    14. Massari, Giovanni F. & Giannoccaro, Ilaria & Carbone, Giuseppe, 2019. "Are distrust relationships beneficial for group performance? The influence of the scope of distrust on the emergence of collective intelligence," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 343-355.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xue, Min & Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2020. "Group consensus reaching based on a combination of expert weight and expert reliability," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    2. Min Xue & Chao Fu & Shan-Lin Yang, 2021. "Dynamic Expert Reliability Based Feedback Mechanism in Consensus Reaching Process with Distributed Preference Relations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 341-375, April.
    3. Wenjun Chang & Chao Fu & Nanping Feng & Shanlin Yang, 2021. "Multi-criteria Group Decision Making with Various Ordinal Assessments," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 1285-1314, December.
    4. González-Arteaga, T. & Alcantud, J.C.R. & de Andrés Calle, R., 2016. "A cardinal dissensus measure based on the Mahalanobis distance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 575-585.
    5. Zhang, Bowen & Dong, Yucheng & Zhang, Hengjie & Pedrycz, Witold, 2020. "Consensus mechanism with maximum-return modifications and minimum-cost feedback: A perspective of game theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 546-559.
    6. Zhang, Zhi-Gang & Hu, Xiao & Liu, Zhao-Ting & Zhao, Lu-Tao, 2021. "Multi-attribute decision making: An innovative method based on the dynamic credibility of experts," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 393(C).
    7. Kangas, Annika & Laukkanen, Sanna & Kangas, Jyrki, 2006. "Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest management--a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 77-92, November.
    8. Meng, Fan-Yong & Zhao, Deng-Yu & Gong, Zai-Wu & Chu, Jun-Fei & Pedrycz, Witold & Yuan, Zhe, 2024. "Consensus adjustment for multi-attribute group decision making based on cross-allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(1), pages 200-216.
    9. Gong, Zaiwu & Zhang, Huanhuan & Forrest, Jeffrey & Li, Lianshui & Xu, Xiaoxia, 2015. "Two consensus models based on the minimum cost and maximum return regarding either all individuals or one individual," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 183-192.
    10. Sun, Bingzhen & Ma, Weimin, 2015. "An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 83-92.
    11. Li, Huanhuan & Ji, Ying & Ding, Jieyu & Qu, Shaojian & Zhang, Huijie & Li, Yuanming & Liu, Yubing, 2024. "Robust two-stage optimization consensus models with uncertain costs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(3), pages 977-1002.
    12. Yin Liu & Wenjun Chang & Xuefei Jia, 2023. "A Group Consensus Model for Multiple Attributes Group Decision Making with Interval Belief Distribution and Interval Distributed Preference Relation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 701-727, June.
    13. Fu, Chao & Yang, Jian-Bo & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2015. "A group evidential reasoning approach based on expert reliability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 886-893.
    14. Meho Saša Kovačević & Lovorka Librić & Gordana Ivoš & Anita Cerić, 2020. "Application of Reliability Analysis for Risk Ranking in a Levee Reconstruction Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2019. "The Ordinal Input for Cardinal Output Approach of Non-compensatory Composite Indicators: The PROMETHEE Scoring Method," MPRA Paper 95816, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2021. "The ordinal input for cardinal output approach of non-compensatory composite indicators: the PROMETHEE scoring method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 225-246.
    17. Dong, Qingxing & Cooper, Orrin, 2016. "A peer-to-peer dynamic adaptive consensus reaching model for the group AHP decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 521-530.
    18. Jiang, Yanping & Liang, Xia & Liang, Haiming & Yang, Ningman, 2018. "Multiple criteria decision making with interval stochastic variables: A method based on interval stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 632-643.
    19. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    20. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.

    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:spr:grdene:v:33:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-024-09876-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.