Paper Titles

Performance Analysis of Refrigerants R134a Two Stage Compression Cycle with an Expander
p.2786

Performance Analysis of Refrigerants R1234yf Single Stage Compression Cycle with a Throttle Valve and an Expander
p.2790

Effect of Cold Rolling Strip Edge Offset on Original Shape Signal
p.2794

Research on RFID Applied in Warehouse Management System of Cigarette
p.2801

Research on the IAMM and IGMM Operators in Group Decision Making with Intuitionistic Preference Relations
p.2806

IDSA: Chord-Based Discovery Service Architecture for the Internet of Things
p.2816

Intercity Railway Passenger Station Location Selection Using Fuzzy Matter-Element Based on Fuzzy Entropy
p.2821

Research on Communication Carriers' Development in Cloud Logistics Age
p.2825

Research on Multiple Attribute Decision Making under Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Environment with Application to Production Strategy Decision Making
p.2829

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 753-755Research on the IAMM and IGMM Operators in Group...

Research on the IAMM and IGMM Operators in Group Decision Making with Intuitionistic Preference Relations

Article Preview

Abstract:

Preference relations are the most common techniques to express decision makers preference information over alternatives or criteria. This paper focus on investigating effective operators for multiple attribute group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Firstly, we extend arithmetic mean method operator and geometric mean method operator for accommodating intuitionistic fuzzy information to present the intuitionistic arithmetic mean method (IAMM) operator and the intuitionistic geometric mean method (IGMM) operator. Then the compatibility properties of intuitionistic preference relations obtained by IAMM and IGMM are analyzed, we found that aggregation of individual judgments and aggregation of individual priorities provide the same priorities of alternatives, and that if all the individual decision makers have acceptable consensus degree, then the collective preference relations obtained also are of acceptable consensus degree. Finally, the results are verified by an illustrative example carried out in the background of parts supplier selection.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Materials Processing and Manufacturing III

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 753-755)

Pages:

2806-2815

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.753-755.2806

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

August 2013

Authors:

Jun Ling Zhang, Jian Wu

Keywords:

Intuitionistic Arithmetic Mean Method Operator, Intuitionistic Geometric Mean Method Operator, Intuitionistic Preference Relations, Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2013 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

[1] E. Szmidt and J. Kacprzyk. Distances between intuitionistic fuzzy sets: Fuzzy Set Syst 114 (2000), p.505.

DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0114(98)00244-9

[2] E. Szmidt and J. Kacprzyk. A similarity measure for intuitionistic fuzzy sets and its application in supporting medical diagnostic reasoning: Lect Notes Comput Sci 3070 (2004), p.388.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-24844-6_56

[3] D. F. Li and C. T. Cheng. New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognition: Pattern Recogn Lett 23 (2002), p.221.

DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8655(01)00110-6

[4] J. F. Pang and J. Y. Liang. Evaluation of the results o fmulti-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information: Omega-Int J Manage Sci 40 (2012), p.294.

DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2011.07.006

[5] L. A. Zadeh. Fuzzy sets: Inform Contro 8 (1965), p.338.

[6] Z. L. Yue. An extended TOPSIS for determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers: Knowl-based Syst 24 (2011), p.146.

DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2010.07.014

[7] K. T. Atanassov. Two theorems for intuitionistic fuzzy sets: Fuzzy Set Syst 110 (2000), p.267.

DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0114(99)00112-8

[8] M. M. Xia and Z. S. Xu. Entropy/cross entropy-based group decision making under intuitionistic fuzzy environment: Info Fus 13 (2012), p.31.

DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2010.12.001

[9] M. M. Xia and Z. S. Xu. Group decision making based on intuitionistic multiplicative aggregation operators: Appl Math Model 37 (2013), p.5120.

DOI: 10.1016/j.apm.2012.10.029

[10] E. Szmidt and J. Kacprzyk. Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets in group decision making: Control Cybern 31 (2002), p.1055.

[11] Z. S. Xu. Intuitionistic preference relations and their application in group decision making: Inform Sci 17 (2007), p.2363.

[12] Z. W. Gong, L. S. Li, F. X. Zhou and T. X. Yao. Goal programming approaches to obtain the priority vectors from the intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations: Comput Ind Eng 57 (2009), p.1187.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2009.05.007

[13] Z. S. Xu. Compatibility Analysis of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relations in Group Decision Making: group Decis Negotiation (2011), p. in Press.

DOI: 10.1007/s10726-011-9278-y

[14] J. Wu and F. Chiclana. Non-dominance and attitudinal prioritisation methods for intuitionistic and interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations: Expert Syst Appl 39 (2012), p.13409.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.062

[15] Z. S. Xu. An error-analysis-based method for the priority of an intuitionistic preference relation in decision making: Knowl-based Syst 33 (2012), p.173.

DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2012.03.009

[16] Z. J. Wang. Derivation of intuitionistic fuzzy weights based on intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations: Appl Math Model (2013), p. In Press.

DOI: 10.1016/j.apm.2013.01.021

[17] M. M. Xia, Z. S. Xu and H. C. Liao. Preference Relations Based on Intuitionistic Multiplicative Information: Ieee T Fuzzy Syst 21 (2013), p.113.

DOI: 10.1109/tfuzz.2012.2202907

[18] Y. Jiang, Z. S. Xu and X. H. Yu. Compatibility measures and consensus models for group decision making with intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations: Appl Soft Comp 13 (2013), p. (2075).

DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2012.11.007

[19] N. Bolloju. Aggregation of analytic hierarchy process models based on similarities in decision makers' preferences: Eur J Oper Res 128 (2001), p.499.

DOI: 10.1016/s0377-2217(99)00369-0

[20] M. T. Escobar, J. Aguarón and J. M. Moreno-Jiménez. A note on AHP group consistency for the row geometric mean priorization procedure: Eur J Oper Res 153 (2004), p.318.

DOI: 10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00154-1

[21] D. H. Hong and C. Kim. A note on similarity measures between vague sets and between elements: Inform Sci 115 (1999), p.83.

DOI: 10.1016/s0020-0255(98)10083-x

[22] Z. S. Xu and R. R. Yager. On consensus in group decision making based on intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations: in: Technical Report, (2007).

[23] K. Atanassov, Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets: Theory and Applications, Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, (1999).

[24] K. T. Atanassov. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets: Fuzzy Set Syst 20 (1986), p.87.

[25] S. K. De, R. Biswas and A. R. Roy. Some operations on intuitionistic fuzzy sets: Fuzzy Set Syst 114 (2000), p.477.

DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0114(98)00191-2

[26] Z. S. Xu. Intuitionistic preference relations and their application in group decision making: Inform Sci 177 (2007), p.2363.

[27] Z. S. Xu and R. R. Yager. Some geometric aggregation operators based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets: Int J Gen Syst 36 (2006), p.417.

DOI: 10.1080/03081070600574353

[28] Z. S. Xu. Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators: Ieee T Fuzzy Syst 15 (2007), p.1179.

DOI: 10.1109/tfuzz.2006.890678

[29] J. Barzilai and B. Golany. AHP rank reversal normalization and aggregation rules: Infor Journal 32 (1994), p.57.

DOI: 10.1080/03155986.1994.11732238

[30] F. Boran, M. Kurt and D. Akay. A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method: Expert Syst Appl 36 (2009), p.11363.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.03.039