Using the Shapley Value to Determine the Expert’s Discourse Right in Group Decision-Making

Abstract:

In terms of different decision-making problem and expert groups, experts’ discourse right is dynamic and relative. Therefore, scientific and rationality of experts empowerment are directly affect final evaluation results. For solving the problem of the objectivity of the evaluation index weight assignment, a method which based on the Shapley value to determine the expert’s weight has been proposed and illustrated in this paper. Firstly, on the basis of analyzing the characteristics of the expert group decision making process, the correlation of experts’ knowledge stock has been defined to represent knowledge spillover among the experts group. Secondly, based on the contribution degree of each expert’s knowledge spillover which has been discussed through correlation analysis, and weight has been allocated to experts. The results show that the method can not only avoid experts empowerment evenly phenomenon, and fully respect the differences of evaluation experts. Finally, the author suggests different types of expert group decisions should be invited to participate in decision-making which helps to give play to brainstorming effect, producing more knowledge spillover and promoting scientific and rationality of decision-making.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 713-715)
• Pages: 2029-2036
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.713-715.2029
• Online since: January 2015
• Authors: Jin Tang, Chun Dong Guo*, Yan Gao
• Keywords: Correlation Analysis, Group Decision-Making, Knowledge Spillover, Shapley Value

References

[1] Meng Bo. Study on Fuzzy multi-objective Group Decision Making Method [J]. Systems Engineering, 1995, 13(4): 43-46.

[2] Meng Bo, Fu Wei. A multi-objective Group Decision Making Method with Finite Alternatives [J]. Systems Engineering, 1998, 16(4): 57-61.

[3] E. Zio. On the use of the analytic hierarchy process in the aggregation of expert judgments [J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1996, 53: 127-138.

DOI: 10.1016/0951-8320(96)00060-9

[4] R. Ramanathan, L.S. Ganesh Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages [J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1994, 79: 249-265.

DOI: 10.1016/0377-2217(94)90356-5

[5] QIN Xuezhi, WANG Xuehua, YANG Deli. Credit Degree Method of Group Decision Making in AHP (I) [J]. System Engineering Theory and Practice, 1999, 19(7): 89~93.

[6] QIN Xuezhi, WANG Xuehua, YANG Deli. Credit Degree Methods of Group Decision-making in AHP (II) [J]. System Engineering theory and practice, 2000, 11 (5): 76-80.

[7] JIANG Wenqi, HUA Zhongsheng. A Method of Clustering Analysis Based on Consensus of Group Judgment [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2005, 13(2): 35-39.

[8] ZHOU Yufeng, WEI Fajie. The Method for Determining the Posterior Weight of Expert Based on Fuzzy Judgment Matrices [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2006, 14(3): 71-75.

[9] Wan Shuping. Congregating of the Experts' Weights Based on Relative Entropy for Group Decision-making Problem with Incomplete Information [J]. COMM. ON APPL. MATH. AND COMPUT, 2009, 23(1): 9-14.

[10] Ye Fan, Hong Zhenjie. Congregating of the Experts' Weights for Group Decision-making Problem with Incomplete Information [J]. COMM. ON APPL. MATH. AND COMPUT, 2006, 20(1): 63-67.

[11] LIANG Liang, XION G Li, WANG Guohua. A New Method of Determining the Reliability of Decision – makers in Group Decision [Jl. System Engineering, 2002(6): 91-94.

[12] WANG Jianqiang. Overview on fuzzy multi criteria decision ma king approach [J]. Control and Decision, 2008, 23(6): 601-607.

[13] Xu X. A note on the subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights [J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, 156: 530-532.

DOI: 10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00146-2

[14] Wan Shuping. Determination of Experts' Weights Based on Vague Set for Multi-Attribute Group Decision-Making [J]. COMM. ON APPL. MATH. AND COMPUT, 2010, 01: 45-52.

[15] Guillaume Haeringer, A new weight scheme for the Shapley value [J]. Mathematical Social Sciences, 2006, 52(1): 88-98.

DOI: 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2006.03.001

[16] DAI Jianhua, XUE Henxin. The Strategy of Profit Allocation among Partners in Dynamic Alliance Based on the Shapley Value [J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2004, 04: 34-37.

[17] Diao Lilin, Zhu Guilong, Xu Zhi. The Profit Allocation of Alliances Based on the Multi-weighted Shapley Value [J]. Industrial Engineering and Management, 2011, 04: 79-84.

[18] Luo li, Lu Ruoyu. Application of the Shapley Value in the Game Model of the Cooperation of Enterprises, Colleges and Institutes [J]. Soft Science, 2001, 15(2): 17-19.

[19] Liu Lang, Tang Haijun, Chen Zhongjun. Application of t he Shapley Value in Game Analysis of Benefit Distribution of Agile Virtual Enterprise [J]. Industrial Engineering Journal, 2006, 9 (6): 118-121.