Author
Listed:
- Mingwei Wang
- Decui Liang
- Zeshui Xu
Abstract
The appropriate rating of software ecosystem health is to the benefit of its sustainable development. The rating method based on an expert panel with specialised knowledge is reliable for rating software ecosystem health. Complexity often causes obstacles for expert panels to give appropriate ratings. Facing complexity, hierarchical criteria system provides evaluation guides with multiple levels and multiple perspectives. However, at present, effective group decision-making under hierarchical criteria system remains a challenge. Thus, this article systematically investigates consensus reaching process and rating method under hierarchical criteria system of software ecosystem health, which are two important components of group decision-making. To master the consensus situation of all criteria and consensus relationships of pair-wise experts under hierarchical criteria system, we construct hierarchical consensus evolution network. Then, we further propose a novel consensus degree measurement and design a consensus reaching process with pair-wise adjustment by utilising hierarchical characteristics. For rating software ecosystem health efficiently, there are usually three ratings including health, sub-health and ill-health. Three-way decisions exactly provide semantic interpretation for these three ratings. Meanwhile, three-way decisions can reduce the risk of incorrect ratings. Considering these advantages, we develop three-way group decisions with hierarchical consensus evolution network to comprehensively rate software ecosystem health under hierarchical criteria system. Finally, take the health rating of the software ecosystem on GitHub as an example, we develop a series of experiment analysis to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method.
Suggested Citation
Mingwei Wang & Decui Liang & Zeshui Xu, 2023.
"Exploring three-way group decisions with consensus evolution network for software ecosystem hierarchical criteria health rating,"
Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(6), pages 1536-1553, June.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:tjorxx:v:74:y:2023:i:6:p:1536-1553
DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2022.2096507
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:tjorxx:v:74:y:2023:i:6:p:1536-1553. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tjor .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.