Abstract

In numerous real decision-making problems, decision-makers (DMs) encounter situations involving hesitant and probabilistic information simultaneously, and DMs show behavior characteristics of nonrational preferences when they encounter decision-making situations with uncertain information. To address such multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) issues with hesitant and probabilistic information and nonrational preferences, a novel method, called the evidential prospect theory framework, is developed herein based on evidence theory and prospect theory, where the associated coefficients in prospect theory are given on the basis of symmetry principles (i.e., the associated coefficients are common knowledge to DMs). Within the proposed method, belief structures derived from evidence theory apply to the experts’ uncertainty about the subjective assessment of criteria for different alternatives. Then, by combining belief structures, the weighted average method is applied to estimate the final aggregated weighting factors of different alternatives. Furthermore, considering the nonrational preferences of DMs, the expected prospect values of different alternatives are derived from the final aggregated weighting factors and prospect theory, which is applied to the ranking order of all alternatives. Finally, a case involving a parabolic trough concentrating solar power plant (PTCSPP) is shown to illustrate the application of the novel method proposed in this paper. The evidential prospect theory framework proposed in this paper is effective and practicable, and can be applied to (green) supplier evaluation.

Highlights

  • In multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems, fuzzy set theory, proposed by Zadeh, is an effective alternative to characterize uncertainty and complexity [1]

  • (2) Evidence theory addresses the problems of the various types of uncertainty in the existing MCDM works, but the literature fails to consider the psychological preferences of DMs, except Nusrat and Yamada [29]

  • A novel method is proposed in this paper. It takes into account the following two situations: (1) DMs show nonrational preferences that are taken into account based on prospect theory; (2) the experts’ subjective judgment of criteria involves hesitant and probabilistic information simultaneously

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems, fuzzy set theory, proposed by Zadeh, is an effective alternative to characterize uncertainty and complexity [1]. (2) Evidence theory addresses the problems of the various types of uncertainty in the existing MCDM works, but the literature fails to consider the psychological preferences of DMs, except Nusrat and Yamada [29]. A novel method is proposed in this paper It takes into account the following two situations: (1) DMs show nonrational preferences that are taken into account based on prospect theory; (2) the experts’ subjective judgment of criteria involves hesitant and probabilistic information simultaneously. Belief structures derived from evidence theory are applied to characterize the experts’ uncertainty about the subjective assessment of criteria for different alternatives, which involves hesitant and probabilistic information simultaneously. Compared to the existing models that address MCDM problems, the evidential prospect theory framework has two advantages: First, the proposed framework characterizes decision-making situations involving hesitant and probabilistic information simultaneously.

Evidence Theory
Prospect Theory
The Concept of HFEs
A Novel Score Function
Evidential Decision-Making Problems
Combining Belief structures
Applying Prospect Theory
A Description of a Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Problem
Evaluations of Each Criterion for Each City
Fusion of Evaluations
Decision-Making Based on Prospect Theory
Comparative Analysis and Discussion
Conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.