Abstract
Although some stochastic multiple-attribute decision making (SMADM) methods based on the stochastic dominance (SD) rules have been proposed, there is still the limitation that the dominance relations between some pairs of alternatives cannot be identified. In this paper, almost stochastic dominance (ASD) rules are used as supplements of the SD rules to identify dominance relations between the pairs of alternatives, and a new method for SMADM based on the SD and ASD rules is proposed. In the method, a procedure for identifying the dominance relation between each pair of alternatives based on the SD and ASD rules is given. Then, according to the identified dominance relation, the priority degree that one alternative is superior to another alternative concerning each attribute is calculated. Further, according to the obtained priority degrees, an approach for ranking alternatives is proposed using the simple weighted method. Finally, the proposed method is applied to the selection of passenger car(s) based on online ratings, and a comparison between the proposed method and the existing methods based on a numerical example is given. The proposed method can obtain more precise ranking results of alternatives. ASD rules are important supplements of the SD rules for identifying dominance relations. Based on the SD and ASD rules, the proposed SMADM method is important for developing theories and methods for SMADM.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
D'Avignon GR, Vincke P. An outranking method under uncertainty. Euro J Oper Res. 1988;36(3):311–21.
Durbach IN, Calder JM. Modelling uncertainty in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Omega-Int J Manage Sci. 2016;64:13–23.
Fan ZP, Liu Y, Feng B. A method for stochastic multiple criteria decision making based on pairwise comparisons of alternatives with random evaluations. Eur J Oper Res. 2010;207(2):906–15.
Garg A, Li JH, Hou J, Berretta C, Garg A. A new computational approach for estimation of wilting point for green infrastructure. Measurement. 2017;111:351–8.
Huang Y, Gao L, Yi Z, Tai K, Kalita P, Prapainainar P, et al. An application of evolutionary system identification algorithm in modelling of energy production system. Measurement. 2018;114:122–31.
Hwang CL, Yoon KP. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1981.
Janjic A, Andjelkovic A, Docic M. Multi-attribute risk assessment using stochastic dominance. Int J Econ Stat. 2013;1(3):105–12.
Jiang YP, Liang HM, Sun M. A method for discrete stochastic MADM problems based on the ideal and nadir solutions. Comput Ind Eng. 2015;87:114–25.
Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Decision with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1976.
Lahdelma R, Makkonen S, Salminen P. Multivariate Gaussian criteria in SMAA. Eur J Oper Res. 2006;170(3):957–70.
Leshno M, Levy H. Preferred by "all" and preferred by "most" decision makers: almost stochastic dominance. Manag Sci. 2002;48(8):1074–85.
Levy H. Stochastic dominance and expected utility: survey and analysis. Manag Sci. 1992;38(4):555–93.
Levy H. Stochastic Dominance: Investment decision making under uncertainty. Boston: Kluwer; 1998.
Li J, Wang J. Multi-criteria outranking methods with hesitant probabilistic fuzzy sets. Cogn Comput. 2017;9(5):611–25.
Liu PD, Zhang XH. A novel picture fuzzy linguistic aggregation operator and its application to group decision-making. Cogn Comput. 2018;10(2):242–59.
Liu Y, Bi JW, Fan ZP. Ranking products through online reviews: a method based on sentiment analysis technique and intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. Inform Fusion. 2017;36:149–61.
Liu Y, Fan ZP, You TH, Zhang WY. Large group decision-making (LGDM) with the participators from multiple subgroups of stakeholders: a method considering both the collective evaluation and the fairness of the alternative. Comput Ind Eng. 2018;122:262–72.
Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang X. A method for large group decision-making based on evaluation information provided by participators from multiple groups. Inform Fusion. 2016;29:132–41.
Liu Y, Fan ZP, Zhang Y. A method for stochastic multiple criteria decision making based on dominance degrees. Inform Sci. 2011;181(19):4139–53.
Martel JM, D'Avignon GR, Couillard J. A fuzzy outranking relation in multicriteria decision making. Eur J Oper Res. 1986;25(2):258–71.
Martel JM, D'Avignon GR. Projects ordering with multicriteria analysis. Eur J Oper Res. 2007;10(1):56–69.
Martel JM, Zaras K. Stochastic dominance in multicriterion analysis under risk. Theor Decis. 1995;39(1):31–49.
Montes I, Montes S. Stochastic dominance and statistical preference for random variables coupled by an archimedean copula or by the fréchet-hoeffding upper bound. J Multivar Anal. 2016;143:275–98.
Nowak M. Preference and veto thresholds in multicriteria analysis based on stochastic dominance. Eur J Oper Res. 2004;158(2):339–50.
Nowak M. Insdecm—an interactive procedure for stochastic multicriteria decision problems. Eur J Oper Res. 2006;175(3):1413–30.
Nowak M. Aspiration level approach in stochastic mcdm problems. Eur J Oper Res. 2007;177(3):1626–40.
Papadopoulos A, Karagiannidis A. Application of the multi-criteria analysis method electre III for the optimisation of decentralised energy systems. Omega-Int J Manage Sci. 2008;36(5):766–76.
Peng HG, Wang JQ. Outranking decision-making method with Z-number cognitive information. Cogn Comput. 2018;10(1):1–17.
Sun B, Xu XF. A dynamic stochastic decision-making method based on discrete time sequences. Knowl- Based Syst. 2016;105(C):23–8.
Tervonen T, Hakonen H, Lahdelma R. Elevator planning with stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Omega-Int J Manage Sci. 2008;36(3):352–62.
Wang HC, Lin DM, Lahdelma R, Li XL. Developing a multicriteria decision support framework for CHP based combined district heating systems. Appl Energy. 2017;205:345–68.
Wang JQ, Kuang JJ, Wang J, Zhang HY. An extended outranking approach to rough stochastic multi-criteria decision-making problems. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(6):1–17 33.
Zaras K, Martel JM. Multiattribute analysis based on stochastic dominance. Springer Netherlands: models and experiments in risk and rationality; 1994.
Zaras K. Rough approximation of pairwise comparisons described by multi-attribute stochastic dominance. J Multicrit Decis Anal. 2015;8(5):291–7.
Zaras K. Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute stochastic dominance for determinist and stochastic evaluation problems. Eur J Oper Res. 2001;130(2):305–14.
Zaras K. Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute dominance for deterministic, stochastic and fuzzy decision problems. Eur J Oper Res. 2004;159(1):196–206.
Zawisza M, Trzpiot G. Multicriteria analysis based on stochastic and probabilistic dominance in measuring quality of life. Multiple objective and goal programming. 3: Physica-Verlag HD; 2002.
Zhang Y, Fan ZP, Liu Y. A method based on stochastic dominance degrees for stochastic multiple criteria decision making. Comput Ind Eng. 2010;58(4):544–52.
Zhou Q, Xia R, Zhang C. Online shopping behavior study based on multi-granularity opinion mining: China versus America. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(4):587–602.
Acknowledgments
This work was partially supported by the National Science Foundation of China (Project Nos. 71871049 and 71771043), the 111 Project (B16009), the Science Foundation of Liaoning Province China (Project Nos. 201602119), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China (Project No. N170605001).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jiang, GT., Fan, ZP. & Liu, Y. Stochastic Multiple-Attribute Decision Making Method Based on Stochastic Dominance and Almost Stochastic Dominance Rules with an Application to Online Purchase Decisions. Cogn Comput 11, 87–100 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-018-9605-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-018-9605-6