Exploiting experts’ asymmetric knowledge structures for consensus reaching: a multi-criteria group decision making model with three-way conflict analysis and opinion dynamics

In multi-criteria group decision making (MCGDM), experts from various backgrounds hold asymmetric knowledge structures, which may impact the opinion aggregation of MCGDM. Hence, considering the experts’ different knowledge structures, this paper applies three-way conflict analysis into opinion interaction for consensus reaching process (CRP). More specifically, we first construct a social network of experts based on the asymmetric influence, which can guide the opinion interaction process. Then, with the aid of three-way conflict analysis, three levels are taken into consideration: (1) With respect to the conflicts from the social relationship level, we identify the conflict relation between the experts and the group via three-way conflict analysis. (2) From the perspective of the alternative level, we develop an opinion interaction rule by dividing the alternatives into strong conflict, weak conflict, and no conflict. (3) From the criteria level, we also design a criteria interaction rule based on the similarity and asymmetry of the experts’ knowledge structures. Thirdly, direction rules with the three levels above are proposed for the CRP. Our proposed method with three-way conflict analysis not only resolves conflicts among experts and minimizes information loss during the process of opinion interaction, but also promotes the CRP. Finally, numerical experiments and comparative simulations are conducted to demonstrate the viability and efficacy of our proposed method.