Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 553

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Consensus Model to Detect and Manage Noncooperative Behaviors in Large-Scale Group Decision Making

Palomares, Iván, Martínez, Luis, Herrera, Francisco·2014·IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems
DOI 10.1109/tfuzz.2013.2262769
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Consensus reaching processes in group decision making attempt to reach a mutual agreement among a group of decision makers before making a common decision. Different consensus models have been proposed by different authors in the literature to facilitate consensus reaching processes. Classical models focus on solving group decision making problems where few decision makers participate. However, nowadays, societal and technological trends that demand the management of larger scales of decision makers, such as e-democracy and social networks, add a new requirement to the solution of consensus-based group decision making problems. Dealing with such large groups implies the need for mechanisms to detect decision makers' noncooperative behaviors in consensus, which might bias the consensus reaching process. This paper presents a consensus model suitable to manage large scales of decision makers, which incorporates a fuzzy clustering-based scheme to detect and manage individual and subgroup noncooperative behaviors. The model is complemented with a visual analysis tool of the overall consensus reaching process based on self-organizing maps, which facilitates the monitoring of the process performance across the time. The consensus model presented is aimed to the solution of consensus processes involving large groups.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tfuzz.2013.2262769

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. klir, 1995, Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic Theory and Applications
  2. macqueen, 1967, Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations, Proc 5th Berkeley Symp on Math Stat and Prob, 281
  3. 10.1016/j.asoc.2012.08.009 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1016/j.ins.2010.08.005 · DOI · Paper page
  5. beliakov, 2007, Aggregation Functions A Guide for Practitioners
  6. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-111X(199901)14:1<63::AID-INT5>3.0.CO;2-S · doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-111x(199901)14:1<63::aid-int5>3.0.co;2-s
  7. 10.1002/9780470140529 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1002/0471708607 · doi:10.1002/0471708607
  9. 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.029 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.07.029
  10. 10.1016/j.ins.2010.08.002 · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.08.002
  11. 10.1109/TFUZZ.2009.2013457 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1109/3477.809032 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/j.ins.2009.11.046 · doi:10.1016/j.ins.2009.11.046
  14. 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.10.034 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2008.10.034
  15. 10.1007/s10726-007-9075-9 · DOI
  16. 10.1371/journal.pone.0032566 · DOI
  17. yager, 2008, Intelligent social network analysis using granular computing, Int J Intell Syst, 23, 1197, 10.1002/int.20314 · doi:10.1002/int.20314
  18. 10.1109/91.928736 · doi:10.1109/91.928736
  19. kohonen, 1995, Self-Organizing Maps, 10.1007/978-3-642-97610-0 · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-97610-0 · Paper page
  20. 10.1016/S1088-467X(99)00013-X · doi:10.1016/s1088-467x(99)00013-x
  21. 10.1016/0020-0255(95)00025-K · DOI
  22. 10.1016/0165-0114(95)00107-7 · DOI
  23. tocqueville, 1840, Democracy in America (2nd Edition)
  24. 10.1016/0377-2217(88)90152-X · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(88)90152-x
  25. 10.1142/S1793005707000720 · DOI
  26. saint, 1994, Rules for Reaching Consensus A Modern Approach to Decision Making
  27. 10.1007/s00500-009-0475-4 · DOI
  28. 10.1109/TFUZZ.2005.856561 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802821 · DOI · Paper page
  30. butler, 2006, On Conflict and Consensus A Handbook on Formal Consensus Decisionmaking
  31. 10.1016/0165-0114(92)90107-F · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1016/0165-0114(86)90014-X · doi:10.1016/0165-0114(86)90014-x
  33. 10.1109/TFUZZ.2011.2170076 · DOI · Paper page
  34. vesanto, 2000, Self-organizing map in Matlab: The SOM toolbox, Proc Matlab DSP Conf, 35
  35. 10.1109/TFUZZ.2011.2173581 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2011.2173581
  36. 10.1109/TFUZZ.2011.2172795 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2011.2172795
  37. 10.1016/0165-0114(78)90001-5 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/0167-8655(95)00119-0 · DOI
  39. tanino, 1988, Non-conventional Preference Relations in Decision Making, 54, 10.1007/978-3-642-51711-2_4 · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-51711-2_4
  40. bezdek, 2007, Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms
  41. 10.1016/0305-0548(96)00002-H · doi:10.1016/0305-0548(96)00002-h
  42. 10.1109/72.846731 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 2011, Consensual Processes Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 267
  44. 10.1109/97.329844 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00087-0 · doi:10.1016/s0165-0114(97)00087-0

Cited by

See all 553

Metadata

Authors
Palomares, I., Martínez, L., & Herrera, F.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems
Publisher
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Published
2014-06
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
516-530
ISSN
  • 1063-6706 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0034
DOI
10.1109/tfuzz.2013.2262769
OpenAlex
W2042508843
Cited by
553
References
0
FWCI
21.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Funders
Research Project TIN-2009-08286 and European Regional Development Fund

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Consensus Model to Detect and Manage Noncooperative Behaviors in Large-Scale Group Decision Making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tfuzz.2013.2262769
The paper
Palomares, I., Martínez, L., & Herrera, F. (2014). A Consensus Model to Detect and Manage Noncooperative Behaviors in Large-Scale Group Decision Making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems. https://doi.org/10.1109/tfuzz.2013.2262769

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.