蕴含权重的偏序集多准则决策法

doi:10.12005/orms.2018.0031

运筹与管理 ›› 2018, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (2): 26-31.DOI: 10.12005/orms.2018.0031

蕴含权重的偏序集多准则决策法

岳立柱¹, 张志杰², 闫艳³

1.辽宁工程技术大学公共管理与法学院,阜新转型创新发展研究院,辽宁阜新 123000;
2.辽宁工程技术大学创新实践学院,辽宁阜新 123000;
3.辽宁工程技术大学工商管理学院,辽宁阜新 123000

收稿日期:2016-06-14 出版日期:2018-02-25
作者简介:岳立柱(1976-),男,黑龙江省大庆人,副教授,博士,研究方向:模糊决策理论与方法;张志杰(1973-),女,辽宁阜新人,讲师,博士,研究方向:决策理论与方法;闫艳(1979-),女,辽宁阜新人,博士研究生,研究方向:决策理论与方法。
基金资助:
辽宁省教育厅基金(LJCR007,LJCR010);辽宁省社会科学规划基金(L15EJY00)

Multi Criteria Decision Making Method of Poset with Weight

YUE Li-zhu¹, ZHANG Zhi-jie², YAN Yan³

1.Public Administration and Law of Liaoning Technical University,School , Fuxin Lnstitute for Transformation and Innovation Development,Fuxin 123000, China;
2.College of Innovation and Practice of Liaoning Technical University, Fuxin 123000, China;
3.School of Business Administration of Liaoning Technical University, Fuxin 123000, China

Received:2016-06-14 Online:2018-02-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 针对偏序集方法不能解决含有权重的多准则决策问题,提出一种“隐式”赋权的偏序决策方法。首先将含有m个方案和n个准则的决策问题表示成偏序集,之后按权重由大到小的顺序,对准则进行逐步相加形成n个新的准则,得到一个新的偏序集。根据偏序集间的包含关系,证明了新偏序集不仅蕴含了权重信息,而且比初始偏序集有更强的排序能力。结果表明,该法在应用中仅需获取权重排序信息,无需精确权重,适用于权重难以确定的多准则决策问题。以三峡库区水质评价为例,例子表明新方法明显优于原有的偏序决策方法,能够对13个方案进行聚类和排序,而原有方法在该例中几乎难以应用。

关键词: 偏序集, 多准则决策, 权重, 评价集

Abstract: In view of the partial order set method that can not solve the multi criteria decision problem which contains weight, this paper proposes a multi criteria decision making method with implicitly empowering weights. First it is expressed as a poset which contains n scheme and m criteria decision problem, then forms a new poset which containsm criterions according to the weight order. The poset relationships which contain each other prove that the new poset not only contains the weighted information, but also has a stronger ability of sorting. This way it only needs weight order without concrete weight in exercising, which is suitable for the multi criteria decision making problems whose weight is difficult to determine. This paper takes the Three Gorges reservoir water quality evaluation as an example, showing that the new method is superior to the original partial order set , and it can cluster and sort 13 schemes, but the original method is hardly applied to this example.

Key words: poset, multiple criteria decision making, weight, evaluation set

中图分类号:

C934

岳立柱, 张志杰, 闫艳. 蕴含权重的偏序集多准则决策法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2018, 27(2): 26-31.

YUE Li-zhu, ZHANG Zhi-jie, YAN Yan. Multi Criteria Decision Making Method of Poset with Weight[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2018, 27(2): 26-31.

参考文献

[1] Lerche D, Bruggemann R, Sorensen P, at al. Acomparison of partial order technique with three methods of multi-criteriaanalysis for ranking of chemical substances[J]. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, 2002, 42: 1086-1098.
[2] Carlsen L, Bruggemann R. Accumulating partial order ranking[J]. Environmental Modelling & Software, 2008, 23: 986-993.
[3] Badinger H, Heinrich W. Reuter Measurement of fiscal rules: introducing the application of partially ordered set(POSET)theory[J]. Journal of Macroeconomics, 2015,43: 108-123.
[4] Halfon E, Reggiani M G. On ranking chemicals for environmental hazard[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 1986, 20: 1173-1179
[5] Halfon E, Galassi S, Bruggemann R. Selection of priority properties to assess environment hazard of pesticides[J]. Chemosphere, 1996, 33(8): 1543-1562.
[6] Winkler P M. Average height in a partially ordered set[J]. Discrete Mathematics, 1982, 39: 337-341.
[7] Winkler P M. Correlation among partial orders[J]. Siam Journal on Algebraic & Discrete Methods, 1983, 4(1): 1-7.
[8] Brüggemann R,Sorensen P, Lerche D,Carlsen L. Estimation of averaged ranks by a local partial order model[J]. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, 2004, 44: 618-625.
[9] Brüggemann R, Annoni P. Average heights in partially ordered sets[J]. Match Communications in Mathematical and in Computer Chemistry, 2014, 71: 101-126.
[10] Loof K D, DeBaets H, Meyer D. Approximation of average ranks in posets[J]. Match Communications in Mathematical and in Computer Chemistry, 2011, 66: 219-232.
[11] Saisana M, Saltelli A, Tarantola S. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. 2005 ,168: 307-323.
[12] 岳超源.决策理论与方法[M].北京:科学出版社,2003.214-215.
[13] 张文修,仇国芳.基于粗糙集的不确定性决策[M].北京清华大学出版社,2005.126-137.
[14] 陈小卫,王文双,宋贵宝,宋殿宇.基于模糊偏序关系的混合型多属性决策方法[J].系统工程与电子技术,2012,34(3):529-533.
[15] Bruggemann R, Voigt K. An evaluation of online databases by methods of lattice theory[J]. Chemosphere, 1995, 31: 3585-3594.
[16] 毛华.偏序集理论在拟阵论中的应用[D].西安电子科技大学,2002.5-6.
[17] 杨学南,郭春香.基于偏序线性扩张的群决策方法[J].西南科技大学学报,2007,22(2):86-91.
[18] 邹志红,孙靖南,任广平.模糊评价因子的熵权法赋权及其在水质评价中的应用[J].环境科学学报,2005,25(4):552-556.
[19] 范懿.一个有关哈斯图的解析方法[J].上海第二工业大学学报,2003,1(1):17-22.
[20] 刘妍.城市空气污染指数改进方案研究[D].河北工业大学,2011.23-24.

蕴含权重的偏序集多准则决策法

Multi Criteria Decision Making Method of Poset with Weight

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	陶玲玲, 尤天慧. 基于在线评价且考虑消费者类型的酒店排序方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(5): 122-128.
[2]	张伟平, 庄新田, 吴冬梅. 基于风险网络结构的资产分配策略研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(5): 161-167.
[3]	高雅, 岳立柱, 周志强. 权重可变条件下员工绩效排名稳健性的Hasse图分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(5): 208-213.
[4]	朱运霞, 昂胜, 杨锋. 基于SMAA和公共权重的决策单元效率评价与排序[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(4): 184-189.
[5]	胡东滨, 谢玲. 基于云模型和证据推理的生态环境安全评价[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(3): 130-136.
[6]	赵萌, 张晨曦, 秦金磊, 张冰. 基于实验设计的概率语言权重信息多准则决策方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(1): 50-56.
[7]	江文奇, 袁亚纯. 融合关联性准则模糊测度的改进型VIKOR方法研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2021, 30(1): 94-98.
[8]	刘超, 汤国林, 刘培德. 基于模糊测度与累积前景理论的区间二型模糊多准则决策方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(9): 70-81.
[9]	耿秀丽, 周青超. 基于概率语言BWM与PROMETHEEII的多准则决策方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(6): 124-129.
[10]	孔造杰, 李斌. 基于理想点-矢量投影法的创新需求权重确定方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(2): 108-121.
[11]	张飞, 岳立柱, 王国辉. 基于偏序集的PROMETHEE方法优化研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(1): 10-16.
[12]	吴伟, 顾丹. 基于偏序集的模糊互补矩阵次序一致性检验与调整[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(9): 85-90.
[13]	宫诚举, 易平涛, 郭亚军, 李伟伟. 考虑评价信息满意度的群体信息集结方法研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(6): 153-158.
[14]	王凤,平轶男,周礼刚,陈华友. 一种基于新的区间二型梯形模糊相似测度的多属性群决策方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(4): 33-41.
[15]	岳立柱, 李良琼. 基于在线信息的群评价模型及其偏序集求解方法[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(3): 111-117.