Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information [An article from: European Journal of Operational Research]
Book Details
Author(s)A. Mateos, A. Jimenez, S. Rios-Insua
PublisherElsevier
ISBN / ASINB000PAA4EC
ISBN-13978B000PAA4E8
MarketplaceFrance 🇫🇷
Description
This digital document is a journal article from European Journal of Operational Research, published by Elsevier in 2006. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Media Library immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.
Description:
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.
Description:
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.
