Abstract

In this paper we deal with group decision-making problems where several decision makers elicit their own preferences separately. The decision makers’ preferences are quantified using a decision support system, which admits incomplete information concerning the decision makers’ responses to the questions they are asked. Consequently, each decision maker proposes classes of utility functions and attribute weight intervals for the different attributes. We introduce an approach based on Monte Carlo simulation techniques for aggregating decision maker preferences that could be the starting point for a negotiation process, if necessary. The negotiation process would basically involve the decision maker tightening the imprecise component utilities and weights to output more meaningful results and achieve a consensus alternative. We focus on how attribute weights and the component utilities associated with a consequence are randomly generated in the aggregation process taking into account the decision-makers’ preferences, i.e., their respective attribute weight intervals and classes of utility functions. Finally, an application to the evaluation of intervention strategies for restoring a radionuclide contaminated lake illustrates the usefulness and flexibility of this iterative process.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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.