4.7 Article

The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH
卷 171, 期 1, 页码 309-343

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.09.017

关键词

multiple attribute decision analysis; uncertainty modelling; the evidential reasoning approach; utility; fuzzy sets; fuzzy ranking; product selection

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [GR/S85498/01] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many multiple attribute decision analysis (MADA) problems are characterised by both quantitative and qualitative attributes with various types of uncertainties. Incompleteness (or ignorance) and vagueness (or fuzziness) are among the most common uncertainties in decision analysis. The evidential reasoning (ER) approach has been developed in the 1990s and in the recent years to support the solution of MADA problems with ignorance, a kind of probabilistic uncertainty. In this paper, the ER approach is further developed to deal with MADA problems with both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties. In this newly developed ER approach, precise data, ignorance and fuzziness are all modelled under the unified framework of a distributed fuzzy belief structure, leading to a fuzzy belief decision matrix. A utility-based grade match method is proposed to transform both numerical data and qualitative (fuzzy) assessment information of various formats into the fuzzy belief structure. A new fuzzy ER algorithm is developed to aggregate multiple attributes using the information contained in the fuzzy belief matrix, resulting in an aggregated fuzzy distributed assessment for each alternative. Different from the existing ER algorithm that is of a recursive nature, the new fuzzy ER algorithm provides an analytical means for combining all attributes without iteration, thus providing scope and flexibility for sensitivity analysis and optimisation. A numerical example is provided to illustrate the detailed implementation process of the new ER approach and its validity and wide applicability. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据