AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (684.7 KB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Open Access

Group Decision-Making Method of Entry Policy During a Pandemic

College of Computer and Information Engineering, Henan University of Economics and Law, Zhengzhou 450046, China
Tourism College, Beijing Union University, Beijing 100101, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Omicron, the new mutant coronavirus, has spread rapidly globally, attracting close attention from different stakeholders worldwide. The complex and constantly changing epidemic situation has had a new impact on the world. Therefore, this paper focuses on the characteristics of the rapid spread of the COVID-19 variant strain. Generally, epidemic prevention experts conduct preliminary screening as part of the existing epidemic plan database according to the current local situation, after which they sort the alternatives deemed more suitable for the situation. Then the decision-makers identify the most divergent expert group, plan for consultation and adjustments, and finally obtain the plan with the smallest divergence. This article aims to integrate the experts’ opinions with the method of minimizing the differences, which can maximize the expert consensus and help organize the schemes that best meet the epidemic situation. The experts’ negotiation and iteration of the differences in the initial plan align with the current complex and dynamic epidemic situation and are of great significance to the rapid formulation of plans to achieve effective prevention and control.

References

[1]
G. Winter, COVID-19 and emergency planning, Br. J. Community Nurs., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 184–186, 2020.
[2]
A. I. Janay, Efficiency of preventive and control measures of COVID-19, Eur. Acad. Res., vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 6474–6489, 2021.
[3]
J. C. Soares, A. C. Soares, V. C. Rodrigues, P. R. A. Oiticica, P. A. Raymundo-Pereira, J. L. Bott-Neto, L. A. Buscaglia, L. D. C. de Castro, L. C. Ribas, L. Scabini, et al., Detection of a SARS-CoV-2 sequence with genosensors using data analysis based on information visualization and machine learning techniques, Mater. Chem. Front., vol. 5, no. 15, pp. 5658–5670, 2021.
[4]
L. Sundaresan, S. Giri, H. Singh, and S. Chatterjee, Repurposing of thalidomide and its derivatives for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections: Hints on molecular action, Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol., vol. 87, no. 10, pp. 3835–3850, 2021.
[5]
M. Freudendal-Pedersen and S. Kesselring, What is the urban without physical mobilities? COVID-19-induced immobility in the mobile risk society, Mobilities, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 81–95, 2021.
[6]
N. E. Ingraham and D. H. Ingbar, The omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2: Understanding the known and living with unknowns, Clin. Transl. Med., vol. 11, no. 12, p. e685, 2021.
[7]
S. Sanchez-Caballero, M. A. Selles, M. A. Peydro, and E. Perez-Bernabeu, An efficient COVID-19 prediction model validated with the cases of China, Italy and Spain: Total or partial lockdowns? J. Clin. Med., vol. 9, no. 5, p. 1547, 2020.
[8]
K. Takemura, Situation dependence of group and individual decision making and bad decisions, in Escaping from Bad Decisions, K. Takemura, ed. London, UK: Academic Press, 2021, pp. 311–342.
[9]
X. J. Gou, Z. S. Xu, H. C. Liao, and F. Herrera, Consensus model handling minority opinions and noncooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision-making under double hierarchy linguistic preference relations, IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 283–296, 2021.
[10]
S. M. Chen, M. W. Yang, L. W. Lee, and S. W. Yang, Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets, Exp. Syst. Appl., vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 5295–5308, 2012.
[11]
T. L. Saaty, A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, J. Mathem. Psychol., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 234–281, 1977.
[12]
Z. M. Zhang and W. Pedrycz, A consistency and consensus-based goal programming method for group decision-making with interval-valued intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations, IEEE Trans. Cybern., vol. 49, no. 10, pp. 3640–3654, 2019.
[13]
Z. Zhang and C. H. Guo, Deriving priority weights from intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations under group decision-making settings, J. Oper. Res. Soc., vol. 68, no. 12, pp. 1582–1599, 2017.
[14]
T. Tanino, Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 117–131, 1984.
[15]
M. M. Xia, Z. S. Xu, and N. Chen, Some hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators with their application in group decision making, Group Decis. Negot., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 259–279, 2013.
[16]
L. A. Yu and K. K. Lai, A distance-based group decision-making methodology for multi-person multi-criteria emergency decision support, Decis. Support Syst., vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 307–315, 2011.
[17]
S. Memiş S. Enginoğlu, and U. Erkan, Numerical data classification via distance-based similarity measures of fuzzy parameterized fuzzy soft matrices, IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 88583–88601, 2021.
[18]
M. H. Zhang, J. S. Kuang, and J. Huang, Double hamming distance-based 2D reordering method for scan-in power reduction and test pattern compression, Electron. Lett., vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 352–354, 2020.
[19]
K. L. Elmore and M. B. Richman, Euclidean distance as a similarity metric for principal component analysis, Mon. Wea. Rev., vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 540–549, 2001.
[20]
Z. N. Liu, X. Y. Yu, L. F. Jia, Y. S. Wang, Y. C. Song, and H. D. Meng, The influence of distance weight on the inverse distance weighted method for ore-grade estimation, Sci. Rep., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 2689, 2021.
[21]
F. J. Hou and E. Triantaphyllou, An iterative approach for achieving consensus when ranking a finite set of alternatives by a group of experts, Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 275, no. 2, pp. 570–579, 2019.
[22]
Y. Sun, J. S. Mi, J. K. Chen, and W. Liu, A new fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making method with generalized maximal consistent block and its application in emergency management, Knowl-Based Syst., vol. 215, p. 106594, 2021.
[23]
Y. P. Li, M. Liu, J. Cao, X. L. Wang, and N. Zhang, Multi-attribute group decision-making considering opinion dynamics, Exp. Syst. Appl., vol. 184, p. 115479, 2021.
[24]
F. J. Hou, A consensus gap indicator and its application to group decision making, Group Decis. Negot., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 415–428, 2015.
[25]
F. J. Hou, The prametric-based GDM selection procedure under linguistic assessments, in Proc. 2015 IEEE Int. Conf. on Fuzzy Systems, Istanbul, Turkey, 2015, pp. 1–8.
[26]
E. J. Emond and D. W. Mason, A new rank correlation coefficient with application to the consensus ranking problem, J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 17–28, 2002.
Tsinghua Science and Technology
Pages 56-65
Cite this article:
Cui C, Li B, Chen X. Group Decision-Making Method of Entry Policy During a Pandemic. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 2024, 29(1): 56-65. https://doi.org/10.26599/TST.2022.9010014

342

Views

16

Downloads

1

Crossref

1

Web of Science

1

Scopus

0

CSCD

Altmetrics

Received: 15 February 2022
Accepted: 26 April 2022
Published: 21 August 2023
© The author(s) 2024.

The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Return