MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184023486 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2021.3093467

A Granular Computing-Driving Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Method for Supporting Large-Scale Group Decision Making

2021· article· en· W3184023486 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanhang Zheng, Zeshui Xu, Witold Pedrycz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConsistency (knowledge bases)Group decision-makingPreferenceFuzzy logicGranular computingComputer scienceSemantics (computer science)LinguisticsFlexibility (engineering)GranularityArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPsychologyStatisticsSocial psychologyRough set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the conditions that: 1) same linguistic term means different things for different people; 2) flexible semantics cannot be represented by original linguistic term; and 3) some semantics given by decision makers are possible to be changed during the consistency improving process, we bring some flexibility and personality into hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference matrix structures by allowing the linguistic preference matrices to be granular rather than numeric, providing a new characterization of linguistic preference matrices. Inspired by the thought of granular computing, this article proposes a new hesitant fuzzy linguistic method to deal with issues when a lot of decision makers provide hesitant and uncertain preference information in the decision-making process. First, we design a multiplicative consistency index and calculate its thresholds corresponding to different dimensions of preference matrix by the Monte Carlo experiment. Then, we construct a hesitant fuzzy linguistic model with granularity level, so as to recharacterize original assessment information and improve the consistency of preference matrices as far as possible. Considering the features of some large-scale group decision-making situation, where the decision makers have little opportunity to take part in multiple consensus reaching processes, hesitant fuzzy linguistic fuzzy <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$C$ </tex-math></inline-formula> -means clustering algorithm is developed to integrate the assessment information given by decision makers. Finally, the final decision-making results are derived. An illustrative example of assessing psychological situation of some COVID-19 infected persons clarifies the reasonability of the proposed method. Finally, we complete some comparative studies and simulation experiments to demonstrate the method’s validity and advantages.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207