zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Examples
Geometry Search for the term Geometry in any field. Queries are case-independent.
Funct* Wildcard queries are specified by * (e.g. functions, functorial, etc.). Otherwise the search is exact.
"Topological group" Phrases (multi-words) should be set in "straight quotation marks".
au: Bourbaki & ti: Algebra Search for author and title. The and-operator & is default and can be omitted.
Chebyshev | Tschebyscheff The or-operator | allows to search for Chebyshev or Tschebyscheff.
"Quasi* map*" py: 1989 The resulting documents have publication year 1989.
so: Eur* J* Mat* Soc* cc: 14 Search for publications in a particular source with a Mathematics Subject Classification code (cc) in 14.
"Partial diff* eq*" ! elliptic The not-operator ! eliminates all results containing the word elliptic.
dt: b & au: Hilbert The document type is set to books; alternatively: j for journal articles, a for book articles.
py: 2000-2015 cc: (94A | 11T) Number ranges are accepted. Terms can be grouped within (parentheses).
la: chinese Find documents in a given language. ISO 639-1 language codes can also be used.

Operators
a & b logic and
a | b logic or
!ab logic not
abc* right wildcard
"ab c" phrase
(ab c) parentheses
Fields
any anywhere an internal document identifier
au author, editor ai internal author identifier
ti title la language
so source ab review, abstract
py publication year rv reviewer
cc MSC code ut uncontrolled term
dt document type (j: journal article; b: book; a: book article)
An interactive procedure for multiple attribute group decision making with incomplete information: Range-based approach. (English) Zbl 0946.91006
Summary: This paper presents an interactive procedure for solving a multiple attribute group decision making problem with incomplete information. The main properties of the procedure are: (1) Each decision maker is asked to express his/her preference in relation to an additive value model with incomplete preference statements. (2) A range-typed representation method for utility is used. The range-typed utility representation makes it easy to compare each group member’s utility information with a group’s one and to aggregate each group member’s utility information into a group’s one. Utility range is calculated from each group member’s incomplete information. (3) An interactive procedure is provided to help the group reach a consensus. It helps each group member to modify or complete his/her utility with ease compared to group’s utility range. (4) We formally describe theoretic models for establishing group’s pairwise dominance relations with group’s utility range by using a separable linear programming technique.
MSC:
91B10Group preferences
91B16Utility theory