Abstract

Multi-Criteria decision making (MCDM), is a discipline aimed at assisting multiple stakeholders in contemplating a decision paradigm in an uncertain environment. the decision analysis to be performed involves numerous alternative positions assessed under varied criterion. a performance score is assigned for each alternative in terms of every criterion, and it represents satisfaction of the criteria by that alternative. in real applications, performance scores are sometimes hard to determine, and they are often subjective. We have developed an intelligent computational argumentation approach for dealing with the problem of uncertainty in resolving the subjective scores. in this approach, an argumentation tree is developed to assess a performance score for an alternative under a criterion. the argumentation takes into consideration the strength of an argument i.e. the degree of support or attack for that argument, and priorities of stakeholders. a set of fuzzy argumentation rules in a fuzzy association matrix is used to assess the indirect impact of an argument on alternatives. Aggregation of strengths of supporting and attacking; direct and indirect arguments represent a performance score of an alternative for a criterion in the decision-making domain. a decision-making case study for developing a mine detection simulator is used to illustrate the method. © 2010 IEEE.

Department(s)

Computer Science

Keywords and Phrases

Computational argumentation; Conflict resolution; Multi-criteria decision making; Performance scores; Priority based reassessment

International Standard Book Number (ISBN)

978-142446619-1

Document Type

Article - Conference proceedings

Document Version

Citation

File Type

text

Language(s)

English

Rights

© 2024 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, All rights reserved.

Publication Date

16 Jul 2010

Download

Full Text Link

Share

 
COinS