SYNTHESIS OF INFORMATION DECISION-SUPPORT TECHNOLOGIES UNDER COMPLEX FORMS OF IGNORANCE
Authors:   Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Kovalenko Igor , Shved Alyona ,   Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University
Published: December 2020

The analysis of multi-criteria techniques showed that at present, methods based on the mechanism of pairwise comparison are widely used. This may be due to the fact that it is easier for experts to compare objects in pairs than, for example, to give them some ordering (ranking). In turn, such methods have a number of disad-vantages, for example, a limitation on the number of elements compared in pairs, the need to evaluate all available elements (objects, alternatives), a high level of con-sistency of expert assessments, etc. A modification of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method based on the mathematical apparatus of a mathematical theory of evidence and a theory of plausible and paradoxical reasoning has been considered as approach that allows obtaining more effective results of pairwise comparison, as well as taking into account various forms of interaction of expert judgments expressed on the same set of initial data and factors such as uncertainty, inaccuracy, fuzziness and incompleteness of expert information. As part of solving the problem of ranking group expert assessments, mathematical models of expert judgments (evidence, assessments) have been developed that allow processing the results of an expert survey in order to construct final rank-orderings of group expert assessments under multi-criteria, multi-alternative, uncertainty and conflicting (contradictory) expert judgments. Alternative approaches of evidence combination in the framework of the Dempster-Shafer model are investigated and a method for constructing a final ranking is proposed, which is based on the complex use of the conjunctive consensus evidence combination rules (Dempster’s, Yager’s, Zhang’s, Inagaki’s, Smets’ rules). The proposed technique takes into account the degree of difference and the structure of individual groups of evidence to choose the order of expert judgments combination. This allows to make full use of the original expert information and exclude situations in which part of the expert information may be lost (for example, when trying to combine contradictory evidence). An adaptive algorithm for choosing the optimal combination rule has been proposed. The adaptability of the algorithm lies in the fact that, depending on the formed set of criteria, one of the considered combination rules is selected for each pair of expert judgments that are combined. As criteria for choosing the rules, the following were considered: information about data sources (experts), their competence, the nature of the analyzed data (information about conflicts and consensus; information about the degree of interaction and structure of expert evidence, etc.). A methodology for synthesis of information technology and a generalized structure of information technology for decision-making are proposed for solving the problem of structuring expert assessments under multi-criteria and complex forms of ignorance based on the methods of the theory of evidence and the theory of plausible and paradoxical reasoning. The practical implementation of the proposed information technology synthesis technique for construction of the final rank-ordering of the analyzed objects is considered on the example of solving the problem of choosing a geographic information systems.