Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information. (English) Zbl 1102.90352

Summary: We deal with group decision-making problems where several decision makers elicit their own preferences separately. The decision makers’ preferences are quantified using a decision support system, which admits incomplete information concerning the decision makers’ responses to the questions they are asked. Consequently, each decision maker proposes classes of utility functions and attribute weight intervals for the different attributes. We introduce an approach based on Monte Carlo simulation techniques for aggregating decision maker preferences that could be the starting point for a negotiation process, if necessary. The negotiation process would basically involve the decision maker tightening the imprecise component utilities and weights to output more meaningful results and achieve a consensus alternative. We focus on how attribute weights and the component utilities associated with a consequence are randomly generated in the aggregation process taking into account the decision-makers’ preferences, i.e., their respective attribute weight intervals and classes of utility functions. Finally, an application to the evaluation of intervention strategies for restoring a radionuclide contaminated lake illustrates the usefulness and flexibility of this iterative process.


90B50 Management decision making, including multiple objectives
91B16 Utility theory


Full Text: DOI


[1] Barron, F.H.; Barret, B.E., Decision quality using ranked attribute weights, Management science, 42, 11, 1515-1523, (1996) · Zbl 0879.90002
[2] Bratley, P.; Fox, B.L.; Schrage, E.L., A guide to simulation, (1983), Springer-Verlag New York · Zbl 0515.68070
[3] Bui, T., Co-op—A group decision support system for cooperative multiple criteria decision making, () · Zbl 0677.68124
[4] Cao, P.P.; Burstein, F.; San Pedro, J., Extending coordination theory to the field of distributed group multiple criteria decision-making, Journal of decision systems, 10, 10, 1-20, (2004)
[5] Håkanson, L.; Gallego, E.; Ríos-Insua, S., The application of the lake ecosystem index in multi-attribute decision analysis in radioecology, Journal of environmental radioactivity, 49, 3, 319-344, (2000)
[6] Harsanyi, J.C., Cardinal welfare, individual ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility theory, Journal of political economy, 63, 309-321, (1955)
[7] Hokkanen, J.; Salminen, P., The choice of a solid waste management system by using the ELECTRE III decision-aid method, ()
[8] ICRP, International Commission on Radiological Protection 1991. 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP, Publication 60, Annals of the ICRP, 20, No. 1.
[9] Jiménez, A., 2002. Un Sistema de Ayuda a la Decisión Multiatributo con Asignaciones Imprecisas, Ph.D. Dissertation, Technical University of Madrid.
[10] Jiménez, A.; Ríos-Insua, S.; Mateos, A., A decision support system for multiattribute utility evaluation based on imprecise assignments, Decision support systems, 36, 1, 65-79, (2003)
[11] Keeney, R.L.; Kirkwood, C.W., Group decision making using cardinal social welfare function, Management science, 22, 430-437, (1975) · Zbl 0339.90002
[12] Kim, S.H.; Ahn, B.S., Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information, European journal of operational research, 116, 498-507, (1999) · Zbl 1009.90519
[13] Kim, S.H.; Han, C.H., Establishing dominance between alternatives with incomplete information in a hierarchical structured attribute tree, European journal of operational research, 122, 79-90, (2000) · Zbl 0961.90097
[14] Kim, S.H.; Choi, S.H.; Kim, J.K., An interactive procedure for multiattribute group decision making with incomplete information, European journal of operational research, 118, 139-152, (1999) · Zbl 0946.91006
[15] Korhonen, P.; Moskowitz, H.; Wallenius, J.; Zionts, S., An interactive approach to multiple criteria optimization with multiple decision-makers, Naval research logistics quarterly, 33, 589-602, (1986) · Zbl 0605.90076
[16] Lahdelma, R.; Salminen, P., SMAA-2: stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making, Operations research, 49, 3, 444-454, (2001) · Zbl 1163.90552
[17] Mateos, A.; Jiménez, A.; Ríos Insua, S., A multiattribute solving dominance and potential optimality in imprecise multi-attribute additive problems, Reliability engineering and system safety, 79, 253-262, (2003)
[18] Mateos, A.; Jiménez, A.; Ríos Insua, S., Modelling individual and global comparisons for multi-attribute preferences, Journal of multicriteria decision making, 12, 177-190, (2003)
[19] Ramanathan, R.; Ganesh, L.S., Group preferences aggregation methods employed in AHP: an evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members’ weightages, European journal of operational research, 79, 249-265, (1994) · Zbl 0815.90003
[20] Ríos Insua, D., Ambiguity, imprecision and sensitivity in decision theory, (), 219-232 · Zbl 0839.62006
[21] Ríos Insua, D.; Gallego, E.; Mateos, A.; Ríos-Insua, S., MOIRA: A decision support system for decision making on aquatic ecosystems contaminated by radioactive fallout, Annals of operations research, 95, 341-364, (2000) · Zbl 0960.91021
[22] Salo, A.A., Interactive decision aiding for group decision support, European journal of operational research, 84, 134-149, (1995) · Zbl 0910.90191
[23] Teich, J.E.; Wallenius, H.; Wallenius, J., Advances in negotiation science, Transactions on operational research, 6, 55-94, (1994)
[24] Vik, R., The lake øvre heimdalsvatn, a subalpine freshwater ecosystem, Holartic ecology, 1, 81-320, (1978)
[25] von Nitzsch, R.; Weber, M., Utility function assessment on a micro-computer: an interactive procedure, Annals of operations research, 16, 149-160, (1988)
[26] Zionts, S., A multiple criteria method for choosing among discrete alternatives, European journal of operational research, 7, 143-147, (1981) · Zbl 0452.90070
[27] Zionts, S.; Wallenius, J., An interactive programming method for solving the multiple criteria problem, Management science, 22, 652-663, (1976) · Zbl 0318.90053
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.