4.5 Article

Stochastic multiple-criteria decision making with 2-tuple aspirations: a method based on disappointment stochastic dominance

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/itor.12430

Keywords

multiple-criteria decision analysis; SMCDM; 2-tuple aspiration; aspiration alternative; disappointment stochastic dominance

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [71571040, 71271050, 71471172]
  2. Shandong Province Social Science Planning Project [16DGLJ06]
  3. Special Funds of Taishan Scholars Project of Shandong Province [ts201511045]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Considering the disappointment aversion behavior of decision makers, we define three types of disappointment stochastic dominance rules and disappointment stochastic dominance degree between two stochastic variables. Then we prove some important properties of disappointment stochastic dominance. With respect to the stochastic multiple-criteria decision-making (SMCDM) problem with criterion 2-tuple aspirations, a novel method based on disappointment stochastic dominance is proposed. To begin with, based on the 2-tuple aspiration on each criterion, for the situations of discrete and continuous stochastic criterion values, the aspiration alternative and its cumulative distribution functions of stochastic criterion values are constructed. Next, the disappointment stochastic dominance relation between each alternative and aspiration alternative is determined based on the definition of disappointment stochastic dominance. Further, the corresponding disappointment stochastic dominance degree is calculated. And the overall disappointment stochastic dominance degree of each alternative over the aspiration alternative is calculated to obtain the ranking result. Finally, an example of selecting desirable computer development project(s) is given to illustrate the feasibility and validity of the proposed method.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available