基于分段策略评分的冲突主体偏好排序方法及其应用

doi:10.12005/orms.2022.0328

运筹与管理 ›› 2022, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (10): 120-126.DOI: 10.12005/orms.2022.0328

基于分段策略评分的冲突主体偏好排序方法及其应用

赵士南, 孙采云, 张光明, 吕娜, 金陆雅

江苏科技大学经济管理学院,江苏镇江 212100

收稿日期:2021-07-29 出版日期:2022-10-25 发布日期:2022-11-14
通讯作者: 赵士南(1989-),男,山东临沂人,讲师,硕士生导师,博士,研究方向为冲突分析、决策理论与方法、运作管理等。
作者简介:孙采云(1994-),女,河南驻马店人,硕士研究生,研究方向为冲突分析和决策理论与方法;张光明(1963-),男,江苏溧阳人,教授,博士生导师,博士,研究方向为决策理论、企业管理等。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(72001096,72101109);江苏科技大学科研启动基金(1042932005)

A Preference Ranking Approach Based on Segmented Option Weighting and Its Application

ZHAO Shi-nan, SUN Cai-yun, ZHANG Guang-ming, LV Na, JIN Lu-ya

School of Economics and Management, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, Zhenjiang 212100, China

Received:2021-07-29 Online:2022-10-25 Published:2022-11-14

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 冲突中各利益主体的偏好信息对冲突局势的演变和纠纷调解具有重要影响。现有的冲突偏好排序方法主要基于决策者对冲突局势或状态、策略权重和声明信息的主观判断和理解,缺乏科学的数据来源支撑。为准确获取冲突主体的偏好信息,本文提出了一种基于调查法的分段策略冲突偏好排序方法。首先,根据决策者类别将冲突策略集合进行分段,并通过问卷、调研等方法获取每个冲突主体对所有分段策略的重要度评分信息。在此基础上,计算决策者对各个冲突状态的综合偏好评分,进而得到状态偏好的排序结果。最后以医患纠纷为例,对比分析了传统策略权重法和分段策略评分法的偏好排序和稳定性分析结果,进一步验证了所提方法的有效性。

关键词: 冲突分析, 偏好排序, 分段策略评分, 医患纠纷

Abstract: The preference elicitation of stakeholders or decision makers in conflicts has a significant effect on the conflict evolution and mediation strategies. The existing preference ranking methods in the area of conflict analysis mainly depends on decision-makers’ subjective judgment and personal understanding of conflict states, option weights and preference statements, which lacks the support of reliable data. In order to obtain more accurate preference information of decision makers in disputes, a new preference ranking approach based on segmented option weighting and practical survey is proposed in this research within the framework of the graph model for conflict resolution. To begin with, the option set is segmented according to the type of decision makers and then the relative importance ranking or weights can be determined by using questionnaires or surveys. Based on the results, the total accumulated score for each conflict state can be calculated by using the segmented option weighing method and then the preference ranking of states for every decision maker can be obtained. Finally, the doctor-patient dispute is modeled and analyzed by using the graph model for conflict resolution methodology. Moreover, the preference ranking and stability analysis results of traditional and segmented option weighting methods are compared, which further verifies the effectiveness of the proposed preference ranking method in this research.

Key words: conflict analysis, preference ranking, segmented option weighting, doctor-patient dispute

中图分类号:

F274

赵士南, 孙采云, 张光明, 吕娜, 金陆雅. 基于分段策略评分的冲突主体偏好排序方法及其应用[J]. 运筹与管理, 2022, 31(10): 120-126.

ZHAO Shi-nan, SUN Cai-yun, ZHANG Guang-ming, LV Na, JIN Lu-ya. A Preference Ranking Approach Based on Segmented Option Weighting and Its Application[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2022, 31(10): 120-126.

参考文献

[1] Fang L, Hipel K W, Kilgour D M. A decision support system for interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution[M]. New York: Wiley, 1993.
[2] Xu H, Hipel K W, Kilgour D M, Fang L. Conflict resolution using the graph model: strategic interactions in competition and cooperation[M]. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018.
[3] Howard N. Paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behavior[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1971.
[4] Fraser N M, Hipel K W. Solving complex conflicts[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1979, 9(12): 805-817.
[5] Hipel K W, Fang L, Kilgour D M. The graph model for conflict resolution: reflections on three decades of development[J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2020, 29(1): 11-60.
[6] Akbari A, Mirnasl N, Hipel K W. Will peaceful waters flow again? a game-theoretic insight into a tripartite environmental conflict in the middle east[J]. Environmental Management, 2021, 67(4): 667-681.
[7] Han Q, Zhu Y, Ke G Y, et al. Public private partnership in brownfield remediation projects in China: Identification and structure analysis of risks[J]. Land Use Policy, 2019, 84: 87-104.
[8] He S, Hipel K W, Xu H, et al. A two-level hierarchical graph model for conflict resolution with application to international climate change negotiations[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2020, 29: 251-272.
[9] 赵金帅,徐海燕,杨保华.基于图模型矩阵理论的决策者心理行为特征冲突稳定性[J].控制与决策,2020,35(07):1730-1740.
[10] Garcia A, Obeidi A, Hipel K W. Two methodological perspectives on the energy east pipeline conflict[J]. Energy Policy, 2016, 91: 397-409.
[11] 赵士南,徐海燕.基于GMCR的双渠道供应链价格冲突动态交互模型[J].运筹与管理,2017,26(10):94-100.
[12] Hamouda L, Kilgour D M, Hipel K W. Strength of preference in graph models for multiple-decision-maker conflicts[J]. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2006, 179(1): 314-327.
[13] Li K W, Hipel K W, Kilgour D M, Fang L. Preference uncertainty in the graph model for conflict resolution[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 2004, 34(4): 507-520.
[14] Bashar M. A, Hipel K W, Kilgour D M, et al. Interval fuzzy preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution[J]. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 2018, 27(3): 287-315.
[15] Kuang H, Bashar M A, Hipel K W, et al. Grey-based preference in a graph model for conflict resolution with multiple decision makers[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 2015, 45(9): 1254-1267.
[16] Rêgo L C, Vieira G I A. Probabilistic option prioritizing in the graph model for conflict resolution[J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2019, 28(6): 1149-1165.
[17] 侯宇航,徐海燕.基于冲突图模型策略优先权排序法的强度偏好排序研究[J].中国管理科学,2016,24(09):64-70.
[18] Yu J, Hipel K W, Kilgour D M, et al. Option prioritization for unknown preference[J]. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 2016, 25(1): 39-61.
[19] Zhao S, Xu H. Grey option prioritization for the graph model for conflict resolution[J]. Journal of Grey System, 2017, 29(3):14-25.
[20] Zhao S, Xu H. A novel preference elicitation technique based on graph model and its application to a brownfield redevelopment conflict in China[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16(21): 4088.
[21] 冯坤,蒲鑫鑫,唐贵忠,高维,程雪莲,何中臣.基于患者视角分析医疗纠纷第三方调解效果——以重庆市为例[J].医学与哲学(A),2018,39(02):42-44.
[22] Petrocchi S, Iannello P, Lecciso F, et al. Interpersonal trust in doctor-patient relation: evidence from dyadic analysis and association with quality of dyadic communication[J]. Social Science & Medicine, 2019, 235: 112391.

基于分段策略评分的冲突主体偏好排序方法及其应用

A Preference Ranking Approach Based on Segmented Option Weighting and Its Application

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	吴正稿, 徐海燕, 邓潇. 信息不对称下的超对策冲突分析反问题研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(3): 27-35.
[2]	陶良彦, 刘思峰, 方志耕, 胡骞. 偏好情景应变式冲突分析模型[J]. 运筹与管理, 2019, 28(1): 108-115.
[3]	赵金帅, 徐海燕. 基于图模型理论有序偏好下的冲突反问题研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2018, 27(3): 143-149.
[4]	赵士南, 徐海燕. 基于GMCR的双渠道供应链价格冲突动态交互模型[J]. 运筹与管理, 2017, 26(10): 94-100.
[5]	孟宏鹏, 徐海燕, 侯宇航. 基于GMCR-NPAWLAK混合模型的冲突分析研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2017, 26(10): 181-187.