zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

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.

a & b logic and
a | b logic or
!ab logic not
abc* right wildcard
"ab c" phrase
(ab c) parentheses
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)
Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information. (English) Zbl 1009.90519
Summary: This paper deals with multiple criteria decision making problem with incomplete information when multiple decision makers are involved. Usually decision makers are willing or able to provide only incomplete information, because of time pressure, lack of knowledge or data, and their limited expertise related with problem domain. There have been just a few studies considering incomplete information in group settings. This incompletely specified information constructs region of linear constraints and therefore, pairwise dominance relationship between alternatives reduces to intractable nonlinear programmings. Hence, to handle this difficulty, we suggest a method, utilizing individual decision results to form group consensus. Final group consensus ranking toward more agreement of participants can be built through solving a series of linear programmings, using individual decision results under group members’ possibly different weight constraints.
90B50Management decision making, including multiple objectives
91B06Decision theory