基于改进模糊熵和证据推理的多属性决策方法

doi:10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2018030677

计算机应用 ›› 2018, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (10): 2801-2806.DOI: 10.11772/j.issn.1001-9081.2018030677

基于改进模糊熵和证据推理的多属性决策方法

熊宁欣, 王应明

福州大学经济与管理学院, 福州 350116

收稿日期:2018-04-03 修回日期:2018-05-05 出版日期:2018-10-10 发布日期:2018-10-13
通讯作者: 熊宁欣
作者简介:熊宁欣(1994-),女,福建三明人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向:决策理论与方法、证据推理;王应明(1964-),男,江苏海安人,教授,博士,主要研究方向:决策理论与方法、数据包络分析。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目（61773123）。

Multiple attribute decision method based on improved fuzzy entropy and evidential reasoning

XIONG Ningxin, WANG Yingming

School of Economics & Management, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou Fujian 350116, China

Received:2018-04-03 Revised:2018-05-05 Online:2018-10-10 Published:2018-10-13
Supported by:
This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61773123).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 针对证据推理方法框架下属性权重难以获取的问题，提出一种基于改进模糊熵和证据推理的多属性决策方法。首先，定义证据推理信度决策矩阵框架下的三角函数模糊熵公式，并证明了其满足熵的四个公理化定义。其次，所提方法能够同时处理属性权重完全未知和属性权重信息部分已知两种情况：当属性权重完全未知时，基于信度框架下的改进模糊熵和熵权法的基本思想计算属性权重；当属性权重信息部分已知时，定义加权模糊熵，建立期望模糊熵最小的线性规划模型求解最优属性权重。最后，利用证据推理算法融合方案属性值，结合期望效用理论得到方案排序结果。通过实例计算，并与传统模糊熵计算方法进行比较分析，验证了所提方法能够更加充分地反映原始决策信息，更具客观性和一般性。

关键词: 证据推理, 三角模糊熵, 客观权重, 多属性决策

Abstract: Aiming at the problem that attribute weights are difficult to obtain under the framework of evidential reasoning, a multi-attribute decision method based on improved fuzzy entropy and evidential reasoning was proposed. Firstly, the formula of trigonometric fuzzy entropy under the framework of belief decision matrix of evidential reasoning was defined, and it was proved that it satisfies the four axiomatic definitions of entropy. Secondly, the proposed method can simultaneously deal with two situations in which the attribute weights are completely unknown and the attribute weights information are partially known. When the attribute weights were completely unknown, the attribute weights were calculated based on the basic idea of fuzzy entropy and entropy weight method under the framework of belief. When part of the information of attribute weights were known, the weighted fuzzy entropy was defined, and the linear programming model with the minimum expected fuzzy entropy was established to get the optimal attribute weights. Finally, the evidential reasoning algorithm was used to aggregate the degree of belief of attributes and got the result of the ranking of alternatives combined with expected utility theory. Through example calculations and comparative analysis with the method of traditional fuzzy entropy, it is verified that the proposed method can more fully reflect the original decision information, which is more objective and general.

Key words: Evidential Reasoning (ER), trigonometric fuzzy entropy, objective weight, multiple attribute decision

中图分类号:

TP18

熊宁欣, 王应明. 基于改进模糊熵和证据推理的多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2018, 38(10): 2801-2806.

XIONG Ningxin, WANG Yingming. Multiple attribute decision method based on improved fuzzy entropy and evidential reasoning[J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2018, 38(10): 2801-2806.

参考文献

[1] FU C, CHIN K S. Robust evidential reasoning approach with unknown attribute weights[J]. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2014, 59(2):9-20.
[2] 陈圣群, 王应明, 施海柳.多属性匹配决策的等级置信度融合法[J]. 系统工程学报, 2015, 30(1):25-33. (CHEN S Q, WANG Y M, SHI H L. Rank belief degrees fusion method for multi-arrtibute matching decision-making[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering, 2015, 30(1):25-33.)
[3] MAHMUD T, NAMIRUR K, MOHAMMAD R, et al. Evaluation of job offers using the evidential reasoning approach[J]. Global Journal of Computer Science & Technology, 2013, 3(2):34-44.
[4] ZHOU Z J, HU C H, XU D L, et al. New model for system behavior prediction based on belief rule based systems[J]. Information Sciences, 2010, 180(24):4834-4864.
[5] DEMPSTER A P. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping[J]. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1967, 38(2):325-339.
[6] SHAFER G. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence[M]. Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1976:85-150.
[7] YANG J B, SINGH M G. An evidential reasoning approach for multiple-attribute decision making with uncertainty[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A:Systems and Humans, 1994, 24(1):1-18.
[8] YANG J B, XU D L. On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A:Systems and Humans, 2002, 32(3):289-304.
[9] WANG Y M, YANG J B. Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 174(3):1885-1913.
[10] JOUSSELME A L, GRENIER D, BOSSÉ É. A new distance between two bodies of evidence[J]. Information Fusion, 2001, 2(2):91-101.
[11] 王小艺, 刘载文, 侯朝桢, 等.一种基于最优权重分配的D-S改进算法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2006(11):103-107. (WANG X Y, LIU Z W, HOU C Z, et al. An improved D-S algorithm based on the optimization weight distribution[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory and Practice, 2006(11):103-107.)
[12] 陆文星, 梁昌勇, 丁勇.一种基于证据距离的客观权重确定方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2008, 16(6):95-99. (LU W X, LIANG C Y, DING Y. A method determining the objective weights of experts based on evidence distance[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2008, 16(6):95-99.)
[13] 王坚强. 基于证据推理的信息不完全的多准则排序方法[J]. 系统工程学报, 2006, 21(4):419-423. (WANG J Q. Multi-criteria ranking approach based on evidential reasoning with incomplete certain information[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering, 2006, 21(4):419-423.)
[14] 朱建军, 胡宏宇, 刘思峰. 基于证据推理的不完全信息决策方法研究及应用[J]. 运筹与管理, 2012, 21(4):85-90. (ZHU J J, HU H Y, LIU S F. An approach to decision-making with uncertain information based on DS theory[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2006, 21(4):419-423.)
[15] 尹德进, 王宏力. 基于信息熵与证据推理的不确定多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2011, 31(5):1308-1310. (YI D J, WANG H L. Uncertain multiattribute decision making method based on entropy and evidential reasoning approach[J]. Journal of Computer Applications, 2011, 31(5):1308-1310.)
[16] BAO T, XIE X, LONG P, et al. MADM method based on prospect theory and evidential reasoning approach with unknown attribute weights under intuitionistic fuzzy environment[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2017, 88:305-317.
[17] YANG J B. Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2001, 131(1):31-61.
[18] 郭凯红, 李文立. 基于证据推理的不确定多属性决策方法[J]. 管理工程学报, 2012, 26(2):94-100. (GUO K H, LI W L Evidential reasoning-based approach for multiple attribute decision making problems under uncertainty[J]. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2012, 26(2):94-100.)
[19] 李浩.准则权重信息不完全的证据推理多属性决策算法[J]. 火力与指挥控制, 2015, 40(1):12-15. (LI H. Evidence reasoning algorithm for multi-criteria decision-making with incomplete attribute weight information[J]. Fire Control & Command Control, 2015, 40(1):12-15.)
[20] 傅艳华, 唐加福, 张化光. 基于证据推理的项目投资综合评价与决策方法[J]. 东北大学学报(自然科学版), 2005, 26(9):840-843. (FU Y H, TANG J F, ZHANG H G. Overall evaluation and decision-making based on evidential reasoning for investment projects[J]. Journal of Northeastern University (Natural Science), 2005, 26(9):840-843.)

基于改进模糊熵和证据推理的多属性决策方法

Multiple attribute decision method based on improved fuzzy entropy and evidential reasoning

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 13

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	彭定洪, 杨扬. 基于毕达哥拉斯模糊Frank算子的多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2019, 39(2): 316-322.
[2]	戴翠琴, 王文翰. 基于主客观赋权的多属性空间节点选择算法[J]. 计算机应用, 2018, 38(4): 1089-1094.
[3]	胡鑫, 常文军, 孙超平. 基于比较可能度的多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2017, 37(8): 2223-2228.
[4]	邓达平, 谢小云, 郭子璇. 直觉模糊环境下考虑有限理性特征的决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2017, 37(5): 1376-1381.
[5]	王翠翠, 姚登宝, 李宝萍. 基于熵和风险态度的二型模糊多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2016, 36(9): 2535-2539.
[6]	马庆功, 王峰. 广义直觉模糊几何Bonferroni平均及其多属性决策[J]. 计算机应用, 2015, 35(12): 3465-3471.
[7]	南洋, 陈琳. 基于客观权重确定的数据中心网络性能评估方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2015, 35(11): 3055-3058.
[8]	卢志刚管未. 基于声誉的多时段多属性供应链伙伴选择模型[J]. 计算机应用, 2014, 34(11): 3258-3263.
[9]	高键鑫吴晓平秦艳琳王甲生. 基于多属性决策的多维时序信任度排序模型[J]. 计算机应用, 2013, 33(03): 720-722.
[10]	张平蒋烈辉刘铁铭谢耀滨. 基于多属性决策的嵌入式操作系统识别技术研究2[J]. 计算机应用, 2012, 32(04): 1060-1063.
[11]	郭凯红牟有静. 基于可能度矩阵的区间型多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2012, 32(01): 218-222.
[12]	尹德进王宏力. 基于信息熵与证据推理的不确定多属性决策方法[J]. 计算机应用, 2011, 31(05): 1308-1310.
[13]	彭方明邢清华刘睿渊. 改进证据推理的联合防空作战效能评估模型[J]. 计算机应用, 2010, 30(8): 2265-2268.