Robust minimum cost consensus models with various individual preference scenarios under unit adjustment cost uncertainty
Information Fusion, ISSN: 1566-2535, Vol: 89, Page: 510-526
2023
- 37Citations
- 9Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In group decision making (GDM), individual opinions and unit adjustment costs are essential factors in reaching a collective consensus. However, in previous studies, most scholars only considered the uncertainty of individual opinions while ignored the uncertainty of unit adjustment costs or had an inaccurate description of unit adjustment cost uncertainty, which increases the risk for decision makers (DMs). This study constructs four types of uncertainty sets to describe the uncertainty of unit adjustment costs more accurately to solve this problem. Moreover, based on multi-role individual preference scenarios, we adopt a robust optimisation (RO) method to reduce the risk of the model, and we propose robust minimum cost consensus models with various individual preference scenarios under the uncertainty of unit adjustment costs. Furthermore, the proposed robust models were applied to numerical experiments on marine ranching in Weihai, China. The results showed that the proposed robust models were more potent than the original model. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is presented and the characteristics of the proposed models are revealed.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1566253522001348; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2022.09.002; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85138798925&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1566253522001348; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2022.09.002
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know