Metodología para la búsqueda de consenso en toma de decisiones grupales multicriterio (MCGDM). Caso de estudio en gestión ambiental
| dc.contributor.advisor | Cortes Aldana, Félix Antonio | spa |
| dc.contributor.advisor | García Melón, Mónica | spa |
| dc.contributor.author | Romero Gelvez, Jorge Ivan | spa |
| dc.contributor.researchgroup | Algoritmos y Combinatoria (ALGOS-UN) | spa |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-02-14T13:04:51Z | spa |
| dc.date.available | 2020-02-14T13:04:51Z | spa |
| dc.date.issued | 2019-12-12 | spa |
| dc.description.abstract | La toma de decisiones grupal busca agregar opiniones de varios individuos en una decisión consensuada. Muchos autores coinciden en que nuestra sociedad moderna es en esencia un problema de decisiones grupal. El conflicto en este tipo de decisiones se presenta debido a la asimetría de información presente en las motivaciones y actitudes de cada miembro del grupo mientras se intenta llegar a una decisión grupal agregada. Esta tesis presenta un aporte original al proponer una metodología novedosa para búsqueda de consenso suave (El consenso bajo un cierto grado de acuerdo) en decisiones grupales CGDM, incluyendo la medición y análisis de influencias entre ellos como herramienta para asesorar el cambio de sus preferencias y persuadir a los expertos en situaciones con alta discordancia. Mediante el desarrollo de dos estudios de caso, esta tesis propone un método para reducir las inconsistencias en las matrices de comparación por pares utilizando un algoritmo de censo de tríadas. Además, el documento presenta dos métodos para calcular el peso de los decisores: el primero a través del cálculo de la influencia con una medida de centralidad inversa normalizada, obtenida del tema formal del análisis de redes sociales. El segundo, a través de la modificación sobre la medida de influencia propuesta en el método DEMATEL. | spa |
| dc.description.abstract | Group decision making seeks to add opinions for several individuals in a consensual decision. Many authors agree that our modern society is essentially a problem of group decisions. The conflict in this type of decisions arises due to the symmetry of information present in the motivations and attitudes of each member of the group while trying to reach an aggregate group decision. This thesis presents an original contribution by proposing a novel methodology to seek soft consensus (The consensus under a certain degree of consensus) in CGDM group decisions, including the measurement and analysis of influences between them as a tool to advise the change of their preferences and persuade experts in situations with high discordance. Through the development of two case studies, this thesis proposes a method for reducing inconsistencies in pairwise comparison matrices using a triad census algorithm. Additionally, the document introduces two methods for calculating the weight of decision-makers: the first through the calculation of influence with a normalized inverse centrality measure, obtained from the formal topic of social network analysis. The second one, through the modification over the influence measure proposed in the DEMATEL method. | spa |
| dc.description.additional | Doctor en Ingeniería - Industria y Organizaciones. Línea de Investigación: Métodos y modelos de optimización, logística y estadística en Ingeniería Industrial y Administrativa. | spa |
| dc.description.degreelevel | Doctorado | spa |
| dc.format.extent | 305 | spa |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | spa |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/75598 | |
| dc.language.iso | spa | spa |
| dc.publisher.branch | Universidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotá | spa |
| dc.relation.references | [1] C.-L. Hwang, M.-J. Lin, Group decision making under multiple criteria: 250 methods and applications, Vol. 281, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. [2] S. Theofanides, The olympian style of management: The first model of decision making at the top, in: 5th International Conference Proceedings: Integrating Technology & Human Decisions–Global Bridges Into the 21st 255 Century, Vol. 1, 1999, p. 780. [3] D. M. Castro, F. S. Parreiras, A review on multi-criteria decision-making for energy eciency in automotive engineering, Applied Computing and Informatics. [4] S. H. Zanakis, S. Theofanides, A. N. Kontaratos, T. P. Tassios, Ancient 260 greeks’ practices and contributions in public and entrepreneurship decision making, Interfaces 33 (6) (2003) 72–88. [5] M. K¨oksalan, J. Wallenius, Z. S., An early history of multiple criteria decision making, in: G. S, E. M. (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis State of the Art Surveys Second Edition, Springer Science+Business Media, 265 New York, 2016, pp. 3–17. [6] D. Bernoulli, Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk, Econometrica 22 (1) (1954) 23–36. [7] G.-H. Tzeng, J.-J. Huang, Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2011. 270 [8] B. Franklin, From benjamin franklin to joseph priestley, 19 september 1772, in: W. B. Willcox (Ed.), The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, vol. 19, November 1, 1779, January 1 through December 31, 1772,, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1772, p. 299300. [9] M. J. Condorcet, et al., Essai sur l’application de l’analyse `a la probabilit´e 275 des d´ecisions rendues `a la pluralit´e des voix, Vol. 252, American Mathematical Soc., 1785. [10] J. C. de Borda, M´emoire sur les ´elections au scrutin. [11] G. Cantor, Contributions to the foundation of transfinite set theory, Mathematische Annalen 46 (1895) 481–512. 280 [12] G. Cantor, contributions to the foundation of transfinite set theory, Mathematische Annalen 49 (1897) 207–246. [13] F. Hausdor↵, Investigations concerning order types, Berigte uber die Verhandlungen der Koniglich Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Mathematische-Physische Klasse 58 (1906) 106–169. 285 [14] V. Pareto, Manuale di economica politica, societa editrice libraria, Manual of political economy 1971. [15] C.-L. Hwang, K. Yoon, Methods for multiple attribute decision making, in: Multiple attribute decision making, Springer, 1981, pp. 58–191. [16] F. P. Ramsey, Truth and probability”, in the foundation of mathematics 290 and other logical essays. new york, harcourt, brace and co. [17] P. A. Samuelson, A note on the pure theory of consumer’s behaviour, Economica 5 (17) (1938) 61–71. [18] J. Von Neumann, O. Morgenstern, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press (1944) 625. 295 [19] J. F. Nash Jr, Equilibrium points in n-person games, Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 36 (1) (1950) 48–49. [20] J. F. Nash Jr, The bargaining problem, Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society (1950) 155–162. [21] K. J. Arrow, et al., Social choice and individual values. 300 [22] C. W. Churchman, R. L. Acko↵, An approximate measure of value, Journal of the Operations Research Society of America 2 (2) (1954) 172–187. [23] W. Edwards, The theory of decision making., Psychological bulletin 51 (4) (1954) 380. [24] W. Edwards, Behavioral decision theory, Annual review of psychology 305 12 (1) (1961) 473–498. [25] H. A. Simon, A behavioral model of rational choice, The quarterly journal of economics 69 (1) (1955) 99–118. [26] G. Debreu, Theory of value: an axiomatic analysis of economic equilibrium., Tech. rep., Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale Uni310 versity, New York (1959). [27] G. Debreu, Topological methods in cardinal utility theory, Tech. rep., Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University (1959). [28] D. Blackwell, An analog of the minimax theorem for vector payo↵s., Pacific Journal of Mathematics 6 (1) (1956) 1–8. 5 [29] L. S. Shapley, Equilibrium points in games with vector payo↵s, Naval Research Logistics Quarterly 6 (1) (1959) 57–61. [30] K. O. May, Transitivity, utility and aggregation in preference patterns, Econometrica 22 (1) (1954) 1–13. [31] E. Adams, R. Fagot, A model of riskless choice, Behavioral Science 4 (1) 320 (1959) 1–10. [32] D. B. Yntema, W. S. Torgerson, Man-computer cooperation in decisions requiring common sense, IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics (1) (1961) 20–26. [33] A. Sen, The impossibility of a paretian liberal, Journal of political economy 325 78 (1) (1970) 152–157. [34] Y. Dong, J. Xu, Dong, Consensus building in group decision making, Springer, 2015. [35] R. Llull, Blaquerna, Alacant : Biblioteca Virtual Joan Llus Vives, 2008, 2008. 330 [36] K. J. Arrow, E. W. Barankin, D. Blackwell, Admissible points of convex sets., in: H. W. Kuhn, A. W. Tucker (Eds.), Contributions to the Theory of Games, Vol. 2, Princeton University Press, Princeton N.J., 1953, pp. 87–91. [37] D. Kahneman, Tversky a.(1979), Prospect theory: an analysis of decision 335 under risk (1979) 263–292. [38] A. Tversky, D. Kahneman, Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty, Journal of Risk and uncertainty 5 (4) (1992) 297–323. [39] B. Ervural, O. Kabak, A taxonomy for multiple attribute group decision ¨ 340 making literature, in: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–8. 40] F. J. Cabrerizo, J. M. Moreno, I. J. P´erez, E. Herrera-Viedma, Analyzing consensus approaches in fuzzy group decision making: Advantages and drawbacks, Soft Computing 14 (5) (2010) 451–463. 345 [41] J. R. P. F. Jr, A FORMAL THEORY OF SOCIAL POWER, Vol. 194, ACADEMIC PRESS, INC., 1956. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-442450-0. 50010-9. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-442450-0.50010-9 [42] L. Coch, J. R. P. French, Human Relationsdoi:10.1177/ 350 001872674800100408. [43] F. Harary, A criterion for unanimity in french’s theory of social power. [44] M. H. Degroot, Reaching a Consensus Reaching a Consensus (October 2013) (2012) 37–41. [45] S. French, Consensus of opinion 7 (1981) 332–340. 355 [46] N. E. Friedkin, E. C. Johnsen, Social influence and opinions, Journal of Mathematical Sociology 15 (3-4) (1990) 193–206. [47] K. Lehrer, C. Wagner, Rational consensus in science and society: A philosophical and mathematical study, Vol. 24, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. 360 [48] F. J. Cabrerizo, J. M. Moreno, I. J. P´erez, E. Herrera-Viedma, Analyzing consensus approaches in fuzzy group decision making: advantages and drawbacks, Soft Computing 14 (5) (2009) 451–463. doi:10.1007/ s00500-009-0453-x. URL http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00500-009-0453-x 365 [49] F. Chiclana, J. M. Tapia Garc´ıa, M. J. Del Moral, E. Herrera-Viedma, A statistical comparative study of di↵erent similarity measures of consensus in group decision making, Information Sciences 221 (2013) 110–123. [50] E. Herrera-Viedma, F. J. Cabrerizo, J. Kacprzyk, W. Pedrycz, A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment, Information Fusion 17 (1) 370 (2014) 4–13. [51] J. Kacprzyk, M. Fedrizzi, A softmeasure of consensus in the setting of partial (fuzzy) preferences, European Journal of Operational Research 34 (3) (1988) 316–325. [52] B. Loewer, Special issue on consensus, Synthese 62 (1) (1985) 1–122. 375 [53] F. Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, et al., A model of consensus in group decision making under linguistic assessments, Fuzzy sets and Systems 78 (1) (1996) 73–87. [54] D. Ben-Arieh, Z. Chen, Linguistic-labels aggregation and consensus measure for autocratic decision making using group recommendations, IEEE 380 Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A:Systems and Humans 36 (3) (2006) 558–568. [55] J. Kacprzyk, Group decision making with a fuzzy linguistic majority, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 18 (2) (1986) 105–118. [56] J. Kacprzyk, M. Fedrizzi, H. Nurmi, Group decision making and consensus 385 under fuzzy preferences and fuzzy majority, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 49 (1) (1992) 21–31. [57] Y. Dong, Y. Xu, H. Li, B. Feng, The OWA-based consensus operator under linguistic representation models using position indexes, European Journal of Operational Research 203 (2) (2010) 455–463. 390 [58] F. J. Cabrerizo, I. J. P´erez, E. Herrera-Viedma, Managing the consensus in group decision making in an unbalanced fuzzy linguistic context with incomplete information, Knowledge-Based Systems 23 (2) (2010) 169–181. [59] E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, F. Chiclana, A consensus model for multiperson decision making with di↵erent preference structures, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans 32 (3) (2002) 394–402. [60] E. Herrera-Viedma, L. Martinez, F. Mata, F. Chiclana, A consensus support system model for group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations, IEEE Transactions on fuzzy Systems 13 (5) 400 (2005) 644–658. [61] E. Herrera-viedma, S. Alonso, F. Chiclana, F. Herrera, A Consensus Model for Group Decision Making With Incomplete Fuzzy Preference Relations, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 15 (5) (2007) 863–877. [62] F. Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, J. L. Verdegay, A model of consensus 405 in group decision making under linguistic assessments, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 78 (1) (1996) 73–87. URL http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url? eid=2-s2.0-0001877416{&}partnerID=40{&}md5= 9f0037aa6e02745283acf5b7e356e698 410 [63] F. Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, J. L. Verdegay, A rational consensus model in group decision making using linguistic assessments, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 88 (1) (1997) 31–49. [64] F. J. Cabrerizo, S. Alonso, E. Herrera-Viedma, A consensus model for group decision making problems with unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information, 415 International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making 8 (1) (2009) 109–131. [65] F. Chiclana, F. Mata, L. Martinez, E. Herrera-Viedma, S. Alonso, Integration of a consistency control module within a consensus model, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowlege-Based Systems 420 16 (SUPPL. 1) (2008) 35–53. [66] F. Mata, L. Mart´ınez, E. Herrera-Viedma, An adaptive consensus support model for group decision-making problems in a multigranular fuzzy linguistic context, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 17 (2) (2009) 279–290. [67] J. T. Garcı, M. J. del Moral, M. Mart´ınez, E. Herrera-Viedma, et al., A 425 consensus model for group decision making problems with linguistic interval fuzzy preference relations, Expert Systems with Applications 39 (11) (2012) 10022–10030. [68] C. Fu, S.-L. Yang, The group consensus based evidential reasoning approach for multiple attributive group decision analysis, European Journal 430 of Operational Research 206 (3) (2010) 601–608. [69] C. Fu, S. Yang, An attribute weight based feedback model for multiple attributive group decision analysis problems with group consensus requirements in evidential reasoning context, European Journal of Operational Research 212 (1) (2011) 179–189. 435 [70] C. Fu, S. Yang, An evidential reasoning based consensus model for multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with interval-valued group consensus requirements, European Journal of Operational Research 223 (1) (2012) 167–176. [71] C. Fu, M. Huhns, S. Yang, A consensus framework for multiple attribute 440 group decision analysis in an evidential reasoning context, Information Fusion 17 (2014) 22–35. [72] C. Fu, J.-B. Yang, S.-L. Yang, A group evidential reasoning approach based on expert reliability, European Journal of Operational Research 246 (3) (2015) 886–893. 445 [73] D. Guha, D. Chakraborty, Fuzzy multi attribute group decision making method to achieve consensus under the consideration of degrees of confidence of experts opinions, Computers & Industrial Engineering 60 (4) (2011) 493–504. [74] S. H. Kim, S. H. Choi, J. K. Kim, An interactive procedure for multiple 450 attribute group decision making with incomplete information: Range-based approach, European Journal of Operational Research 118 (1) (1999) 139– 152. [75] B. Sun, W. Ma, An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application, 455 Omega 51 (2015) 83–92. [76] L. Rosell´o, M. S´anchez, N. Agell, F. Prats, F. A. Mazaira, Using consensus and distances between generalized multi-attribute linguistic assessments for group decision-making, Information Fusion 17 (2014) 83–92. [77] R. O. Parreiras, P. Y. Ekel, J. S. C. Martini, R. M. Palhares, A flexible 460 consensus scheme for multicriteria group decision making under linguistic assessments, Information Sciences 180 (7) (2010) 1075–1089. [78] Z. Xu, An automatic approach to reaching consensus in multiple attribute group decision making, Computers & Industrial Engineering 56 (4) (2009) 1369–1374. 465 [79] J. Xu, Z. Wu, A discrete consensus support model for multiple attribute group decision making, Knowledge-Based Systems 24 (8) (2011) 1196–1202. [80] J. Xu, Z. Wu, Y. Zhang, A consensus based method for multi-criteria group decision making under uncertain linguistic setting, Group Decision and Negotiation 23 (1) (2014) 127–148. 470 [81] S. Alonso, E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Chiclana, F. Herrera, A web based consensus support system for group decision making problems and incomplete preferences, Information Sciences 180 (23) (2010) 4477–4495. [82] S. Alonso, I. J. P´erez, F. J. Cabrerizo, E. Herrera-Viedma, A linguistic consensus model for Web 2.0 communities, Applied Soft Computing Journal 475 13 (1) (2013) 149–157. 83] I. J. P´erez, F. J. Cabrerizo, E. Herrera-Viedma, A mobile decision support system for dynamic group decision-making problems, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans 40 (6) (2010) 1244–1256. 480 [84] I. J. P´erez, F. J. Cabrerizo, E. Herrera-Viedma, Group decision making problems in a linguistic and dynamic context, Expert Systems with Applications 38 (3) (2011) 1675–1688. [85] J. Kacprzyk, S. Zadro˙zny, Soft computing and web intelligence for supporting consensus reaching, Soft Computing 14 (8) (2010) 833–846. 485 [86] S. Zadro˙zny, J. Kacprzyk, An internet-based group decision and consensus reaching support system, in: Applied decision support with soft computing, Springer, 2003, pp. 263–276. [87] I. Palomares, F. J. Estrella, L. Mart´ınez, F. Herrera, Consensus under a fuzzy context: Taxonomy, analysis framework AFRYCA and experimental 490 case of study, Information Fusion 20 (1) (2014) 252–271. [88] S. Hartmann, C. Martini, J. Sprenger, Consensual decision-making among epistemic peers, Episteme 6 (2) (2009) 110–129. [89] N. H. Kamis, F. Chiclana, J. Levesley, An influence-driven feedback system for preference similarity network clustering based consensus group decision 495 making model, Information Fusion 52 (2019) 257–267. [90] R. Rodr´ıguez, I. Palomares, L. Mart´ınez, Attitude-based consensus model for heterogeneous group decision making, in: Knowledge Engineering and Management, Springer, 2014, pp. 279–290. [91] F. J. Quesada, I. Palomares, L. Mart´ınez, Using computing with words for 500 managing non-cooperative behaviors in large scale group decision making, in: Granular Computing and Decision-Making, Springer, 2015, pp. 97–121. [92] M. Aria, C. Cuccurullo, bibliometrix: An r-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis, Journal of Informetrics 11 (4) (2017) 959–975. [93] M. J. Cobo, A. G. L´opez-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, An ap505 proach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field, Journal of Informetrics 5 (1) (2011) 146–166. [94] E. Garfield, Historiographic mapping of knowledge domains literature, Journal of Information Science 30 (2) (2004) 119–145. 510 [95] J. Kacprzyk, Group decision making with a fuzzy linguistic majority, Fuzzy sets and systems 18 (2) (1986) 105–118. [96] G. Bordogna, M. Fedrizzi, G. Pasi, A linguistic modeling of consensus in group decision making based on OWA operators, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A:Systems and Humans. 27 (1) (1997) 515 126–132. | spa |
| dc.rights | Derechos reservados - Universidad Nacional de Colombia | spa |
| dc.rights.accessrights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | spa |
| dc.rights.license | Atribución-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional | spa |
| dc.rights.spa | Acceso abierto | spa |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | spa |
| dc.subject.ddc | Ingeniería y operaciones afines | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | CGDM | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | CGDM | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Consenso-suave | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Soft consensus | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | Toma de decisiones grupal | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Group decision making | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | Análisis de redes sociales | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Social network analysis | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | Influence | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | Influencia | spa |
| dc.subject.proposal | Persuasion | eng |
| dc.subject.proposal | Persuasión | spa |
| dc.title | Metodología para la búsqueda de consenso en toma de decisiones grupales multicriterio (MCGDM). Caso de estudio en gestión ambiental | spa |
| dc.type | Trabajo de grado - Doctorado | spa |
| dc.type.coar | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_db06 | spa |
| dc.type.coarversion | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aa | spa |
| dc.type.content | Text | spa |
| dc.type.driver | info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis | spa |
| dc.type.version | info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion | spa |
| oaire.accessrights | http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 | spa |