Sudden accident multi-attribute consensus decision-making method and system based on coordination time

Abstract

The invention belongs to the field of unexpected accident consensus decision making, and provides an unexpected accident multi-attribute consensus decision making method and system based on coordination time in order to solve the problem that a traditional consensus decision making method cannot effectively cope with time urgency. The unexpected accident multi-attribute consensus decision-making method package based on coordination time constructs an asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function and a coordination cost function corresponding to each decision-making expert; according to the asymmetric non-linear coordination time function, analyzing requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in sudden accidents in different situations, determining whether to perform corresponding constraint limitation on the coordination cost function, and constructing a shortest coordination time consensus decision-making model; and in the consensus adjustment range, the optimal solution consensus matrix of the sudden accident is calculated by utilizing the matrix evaluation values of the decision experts for different schemes and different attributes, and the optimal scheme of the consensus decision of the decision experts in the current coal mine sudden accident is obtained. The emergency requirements of various sudden accidents on the knock of solutions can be met.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention belongs to the field of consensus decision-making for sudden accidents, and in particular relates to a method and system for consensus decision-making for sudden accidents based on coordinated time. Background Art

[0002] The statements in this section merely provide background information related to the present invention and do not necessarily constitute prior art.

[0003] Emergency response to emergencies refers to the actions taken when an emergency occurs. It is an emergency response to public emergencies, orderly rescue, and emergency disposal work to reduce losses. Taking coal mine accidents as an example, the main characteristics of coal mine accidents are that they occur quickly, are difficult to predict, and may trigger chain reactions, causing widespread human and economic losses. The hazards of coal mine accidents include threatening the lives of miners, destroying the ecological environment of mining areas, affecting the stability of the coal supply chain, and posing serious challenges to social stability and economic development.

[0004] The emergency decision-making plan for emergencies is implemented after decision-making experts and scholars in various fields reach a consensus after multiple rounds of research and analysis. Usually, the initial views of decision-making experts and scholars may not be consistent, and a certain degree of opinion adjustment is required to reach a consensus. This process will involve additional coordination costs, which not only include time consumption, but also cover multiple aspects such as resource allocation and improvement of coordination capabilities. Emergency decision-making for emergencies needs to be studied from multiple scenarios, multiple departments, multiple plans, and multiple attributes. The urgency of emergencies requires decision makers to reach a consensus in a short time. Traditional methods usually consider economic costs, time consumption, and human and material resource conditions as unified unit adjustment costs, which will lead to the inability to effectively respond to time urgency in major emergencies. Summary of the invention

[0005] In order to solve the technical problems existing in the above-mentioned background technology, the present invention provides a multi-attribute consensus decision-making method and system for sudden accidents based on coordination time, which matrixes the evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by decision-making experts in various fields, constructs a coordination time function, establishes a consensus model with the shortest coordination time as the goal, and solves it to obtain the consensus optimal solution that guarantees time urgency under different constraints, thereby meeting the urgent requirements of various sudden accidents for finalizing solutions.

[0006] In order to achieve the above object, the present invention adopts the following technical solution: The first aspect of the present invention provides a multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time.

[0007] A multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time, comprising: Obtain the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, which include consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost, and consensus adjustment range; Based on the consensus tolerance of each decision-making expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision-making expert is constructed; based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision-making expert, the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision-making expert is constructed; According to the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios are analyzed, and then it is determined whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model is constructed; Based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model, within the consensus adjustment range, the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency accident is calculated by using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by each decision expert; According to the optimal solution consensus matrix, the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution are weighted and aggregated and sorted, and the solution with the highest score is used as the optimal solution for the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

[0008] As an implementation method, A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on attributes The expression is: ; in, They represent the lower and upper absolute values ​​of the consensus tolerance range respectively; They represent the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment tolerance interval respectively; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes.

[0009] As an implementation method, in a consensus decision-making situation that emphasizes both coordination time efficiency and coordination cost control, j Scheme No. k The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time and cost constraints for this attribute is: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

[0010] As an implementation, when the consensus adjustment range When Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time and cost constraints for this attribute is: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first k Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first k The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

[0011] As an implementation method, when the coordination cost constraint makes the coordination cost constraint When coordinating time as an important basis for decision-making in the early stages of an emergency, Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time without cost constraints for this attribute is: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

[0012] As an implementation, when the consensus adjustment range At the time, Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time without cost constraints for this attribute is: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; represents the number of decision-making experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

[0013] The second aspect of the present invention provides a multi-attribute consensus decision-making system for sudden accidents based on coordinated time.

[0014] A multi-attribute consensus decision-making system for sudden accidents based on coordinated time, comprising: A consensus adjustment parameter acquisition module, which is used to obtain the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, including consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost and consensus adjustment range; The coordination time and cost function construction module is used to construct the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision expert based on the consensus tolerance of each decision expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval; and to construct the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision expert based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision expert; A consensus decision model building module is used to analyze the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios based on the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, and then determine whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and build a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model; The optimal solution consensus matrix calculation module is used to calculate the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model and within the consensus adjustment range, using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by various decision experts; The consensus optimal solution determination module is used to weight and aggregate the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution according to the optimal solution consensus matrix and sort them, and use the solution with the highest score as the optimal solution for the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

[0015] A third aspect of the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium.

[0016] A computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as described above.

[0017] A fourth aspect of the present invention provides a computer program product.

[0018] A computer program product includes a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the above-mentioned multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time.

[0019] A fifth aspect of the present invention provides an electronic device.

[0020] An electronic device comprises a memory, a processor and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein when the processor executes the program, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as described above are implemented.

[0021] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: (1) The present invention aims to solve the problem that consensus decision-making by decision-makers is slow and difficult to unify during the solution determination process. With the minimization of consensus coordination time among decision-makers as the optimization goal, a consensus decision-making model with the shortest coordination time is constructed. Combined with the decision-making experts' evaluation of the solution, consensus tolerance, adjustment tolerance and other parameters, a specific analysis is conducted in relevant emergency cases, providing corresponding measures for the design and optimization of consensus decision-making based on the opinions of decision-makers in multiple fields. This achieves the shortest coordination time for decision-makers in various fields to reach a consensus on the solution after the occurrence of an emergency. While ensuring the quality of the decision, it can significantly improve the timeliness of the decision-making process and ensure that rapid and reasonable emergency decisions are made in emergency situations.

[0022] (2) The present invention fully considers the original opinions and actual conditions of each expert, and flexibly adjusts the decision-making plan. When the consensus adjustment boundary of each expert is 0, the consensus process has a tough nature. The opinions of the experts must reach a complete consensus in the shortest time to ensure the rapid initiation of emergency response, minimize disaster losses, effectively improve the scientificity and practicality of emergency decision-making, and ensure rapid response and long-term feasibility in emergency situations.

[0023] (3) The present invention establishes the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time with and without cost constraints for different situations after an emergency accident occurs. In the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time without cost constraints, decision experts express their opinions and make decisions to obtain the optimal consensus solution with the main goal of ensuring the shortest total coordination time, regardless of the cost. In the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time with cost constraints, factors such as human cost, material cost and financial cost are taken into account. The decision-making process not only ensures the quality of the decision, but also pays attention to practical feasibility. Through these two models, it is ensured that the emergency decision-making of coal mine accidents has both theoretical optimality and practical feasibility in implementation.

[0024] Advantages of additional aspects of the present invention will be given in part in the following description, and in part will become obvious from the following description, or will be learned through practice of the present invention. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0025] The accompanying drawings in the specification, which constitute a part of the present invention, are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention. The exemplary embodiments of the present invention and their descriptions are used to explain the present invention and do not constitute improper limitations on the present invention.

[0026] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of a multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 is the optimal solution without coordination cost constraint in the embodiment of the present invention. changes; Figure 3 is the optimal solution under the coordination cost constraint of the embodiment of the present invention. changes; Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of the structure of a multi-attribute consensus decision-making system for sudden accidents based on coordinated time according to an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0027] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments.

[0028] It should be noted that the following detailed descriptions are all illustrative and intended to provide further explanation of the present invention. Unless otherwise specified, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meanings as those commonly understood by those skilled in the art to which the present invention belongs.

[0029] It should be noted that the terms used herein are only for describing specific embodiments and are not intended to limit exemplary embodiments according to the present invention. As used herein, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the singular form is also intended to include the plural form. In addition, it should be understood that when the terms "comprising" and / or "including" are used in this specification, it indicates the presence of features, steps, operations, devices, components and / or combinations thereof.

[0030] Embodiment 1 The present invention aims at the problem that the consensus decision-making of decision-making experts is slow and difficult to unify in the process of determining the solution. With the minimum consensus coordination time of the decision-making expert group as the optimization goal, a multi-attribute consensus decision-making framework considering the consensus time is constructed to obtain the consensus decision-making model with the shortest coordination time. Combined with the decision-making experts' decision evaluation of the solution, consensus tolerance, adjustment allowable range and other parameters, based on the cyclic consensus method, a specific analysis is conducted in relevant emergency cases, and corresponding measures are provided for the consensus decision design and optimization of the aggregation of decision-making experts' opinions in multiple fields, so as to achieve the shortest coordination time for decision-making experts in various fields to reach a consensus on the solution after the emergency occurs.

[0031] The following sudden accident takes a coal mine accident as an example. It is assumed that there are m people working in the coal mine accident area, m1 people are safely lifted up, and m2 people are trapped underground; the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time of the present invention is introduced in detail.

[0032] The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time in the embodiment of the present invention comprises at least steps S101 to S105. Figure 1 Let’s give a detailed description of the multi-attribute consensus decision-making process for emergencies based on coordinated time: Step S101: Obtain the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, which include consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost and consensus adjustment range.

[0033] The consensus tolerance here , the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment tolerance interval , Unit decision adjustment cost and consensus adjustment range , where these parameters are all positive numbers.

[0034] In the group decision-making problem of coal mine accidents, each decision maker has a certain tolerance for changes in his or her opinions, that is, If the consensus opinion among decision makers is Within the tolerance range of acceptable deviation, then It describes the cost-free adjustment range of the decision maker. Since the decision maker will not allow unlimited adjustment of his decision information, the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval are Describes the maximum range in which decision makers can adjust their original opinions. If the decision makers exceed this range, they will be considered as non-cooperators and not included in the consensus process. Indicates the maximum downward adjustment boundary, Indicates the maximum upward adjustment boundary. Each decision maker will inevitably consume costs in the process of consensus adjustment, including human costs, material costs, financial costs, etc. Therefore, the cost value required for each decision maker to adjust the unit decision is introduced. . Limits through consensus metrics The difference between the final decision value of each decision maker and the consensus decision value is restricted to measure the difference between individual preferences and collective opinions, thereby controlling the degree of consensus and making multiple consensus adjustments to the decision experts' preferences.

[0035] Assume 20 decision experts Discussing the solution to the incident, including 5 emergency officials, noted as ; 5 armed police officers, recorded as ; 5 miners' representatives, recorded as ; 5 geological decision-making experts, denoted as .

[0036] In this coal mine water seepage accident, assuming the maximum cost consumption , the decision maker's unit adjustment cost The values ​​are equal and both are 5. The consensus level and coordination time parameters of each decision maker are shown in Table 1.

[0037] Table 1. Consensus level and coordination time parameters

[0038] Step S102: Based on the consensus tolerance of each decision expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, construct the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision expert; based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision expert, construct the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision expert.

[0039] The formation of consensus among decision-making experts usually requires all parties to fully express their views, understandings and needs, and to reach a relatively balanced and acceptable result through certain negotiations and compromises, which consumes a lot of coordination time and cost. , establish the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision expert, and the overall cost consumption limit is recorded as M , to describe the cost consumed by decision experts to adjust their decisions during the consensus process.

[0040] The coordination cost function corresponding to each decision-making expert refers to the resources consumed in order to coordinate the decision-makers, communicate different opinions, and reach a consensus, excluding the coordination time, which is expressed as: ; in, represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process.

[0041] Suppose the decision coordination time of each decision maker for different scheme attributes is recorded as , the overall time consumption limit is recorded as T . It expresses the relative time required for decision makers to adjust their decisions, not a function that directly expresses time. Representing decision makers The decision adjustment does not need to consume time. When increases, the decision-maker's decision-making coordination time will increase, and it will be more difficult to achieve consensus. However, in the case of coal mine accidents, time is urgent, not endless, and decision-makers are unwilling to make unlimited preference adjustments.

[0042] Based on the consensus tolerance of each decision expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, an asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision expert is constructed to characterize the relative time required for the decision expert to make a decision adjustment.

[0043] Among them, A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on attributes The expression is: ; in, They represent the lower and upper absolute values ​​of the consensus tolerance range respectively; They represent the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment tolerance interval respectively; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes.

[0044] When decision makers Unacceptable time-consuming decision adjustments, i.e. consensus tolerance When , the coordinated time function can be transformed into the following form: ; Step S103: According to the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, analyze the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios, and then determine whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and construct a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model.

[0045] According to the coordination time function, the present invention analyzes the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in coal mine accidents under different scenarios, imposes corresponding constraints on consensus coordination costs, and constructs a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model. In order to fully respect the original opinions of each decision maker, a soft consensus model is established. When the time of an emergency is extremely tight and the coordination cost rescue should be ignored, a model without coordination cost constraints is established. When time is tight and the costs of manpower, material resources, financial resources, etc. are limited, a corresponding model with coordination cost constraints is established.

[0046] In emergency decision-making situations where time factors are relatively ample, such as the mid- and late-stages of major emergencies. In order to better achieve the rational allocation of time and resources, cost constraints usually need to be taken into consideration. In the consensus decision-making scenario that emphasizes both coordination time efficiency and coordination cost control, the shortest coordination time consensus decision model with cost constraints for the kth attribute of the jth solution for: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

[0047] The Model It is mainly applicable to consensus decision-making scenarios that emphasize both coordination time efficiency and coordination cost control, and can be applied to the mid- and late-stages of certain coal mine accidents. In this case, multi-attribute consensus decision-making has certain requirements for both coordination time and coordination cost indicators, and this model can provide a good description of importance.

[0048] When consensus adjusts the scope When Scheme No. Consensus decision model with shortest coordination time and cost constraints based on attributes Degenerate into model : ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first k Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first k The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

[0049] Model It is suitable for situations where it is either right or wrong, for example: in corporate negotiations, two companies establish hard indicators in the contract to achieve their respective interests; in the event of a sudden accident in a coal mine, the emergency command center adopts tough measures to protect the lives and property of the people.

[0050] When the coordination cost constraint makes the coordination cost constraint When the model In the early stages of an emergency where coordination time is an important basis for decision making, Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time without cost constraints for this attribute is: ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

[0051] Restrictions The decision matrix after preference adjustment must be controlled within a certain range with the consensus matrix, which is a necessary condition for achieving group consensus. This model is mainly suitable for situations where time is very tight, such as the initial stage of a major emergency. In this situation, in order to better solve the problem of the emergency, the emergency command center often conducts consensus decision-making regardless of cost, so time control is more important. The establishment of this model has a good description of the situation of racing against time to solve major emergencies in the early stage of the emergency.

[0052] Model Pay more attention to the original position of decision makers, when consensus adjusts the scope When Scheme No. The cost-free minimum coordination time consensus decision model with attributes continues to degenerate into the model : ; in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; represents the number of decision-making experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

[0053] The shortest coordination time consensus decision model of the present invention can adjust parameters to make tough consensus decisions or allow decision makers to maintain their original opinions to a certain extent according to different scenarios and urgency of coal mine accidents.

[0054] Step S104: Based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model, within the consensus adjustment range, the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency accident is calculated by using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by various decision experts.

[0055] Assume that there is n Decision makers ( )right m Emergency Plans ( )conduct l Evaluation indicators ( ), then the evaluation of each decision maker can form a decision matrix ,in Indicates iA decision maker Scheme No. Considering the tolerance of decision makers, the evaluation adjustment values ​​of each decision maker can constitute the adjustment decision matrix ,in Indicates A decision expert Scheme No. The optimal consensus matrix is ​​the adjusted decision value of each attribute after the consensus process. ,in is the optimal consensus value, which is The ordered weighting of .

[0056] After preliminary evaluation, 5 options were proposed Conduct discussion and evaluation.

[0057] : Use partial blasting and arrange mining machines to operate, : Arrange mechanically driven pump for drainage, : Arrange partial blasting and clear space for firefighters to enter the mine, : Organize armed police and firefighters to clear obstacles and unload the mine cars. : Arrange excavators and deep hole drills. Use the following multi-attribute judgment criteria: : Personnel safety rate (scale: 0-100; unit: %; type: benefit standard), : rescue time (scale: 0-10; unit: day; type: cost standard), : Rescue cost (scale: 0-1; type: cost standard). The original decision data of each decision maker are shown in Table 2. The decision makers are all decision experts in various fields, and the opinions of each decision maker should be carefully considered.

[0058] Table 2 Original decision data

[0059] The specific process of step S104 includes: Step S1041: n The decision makers sort the evaluation values ​​of each attribute of each scheme in ascending order. The decision value sorting is defined as .

[0060] Step S1042, determine the adjustment range of the consensus optimal solution. Assume the optimal solution , if any and If established, Increment on the right; if and If established, Decrease on the left. Initially, , when the condition is not met, Continue to judge, if it is still not satisfied, then Continue to judge, and then loop according to this judgment condition until the restriction condition is met, so that the corresponding optimal solution range can be found and .

[0061] Step S1043, using the sorting and left and right boundary ranges of the optimal solution, the optimal consensus solution and the optimal value of the objective function. In A and B is the boundary point of the constraint condition, and , then the optimal solution exists in the following three cases: (1) When When the model The optimal solution is: ; The optimal value of the objective function is: ; (2) When When the model The optimal solution is: ; The optimal value of the objective function is: ; (3) When When the model The optimal solution is: ; The optimal value of the objective function is: ; in, are the left and right boundaries under the coordination cost constraint, Obtained by looping through step S1042.

[0062] The results explore the coordination time model with cost constraints While respecting the original preferences of decision makers, the optimal solutions and the optimal values ​​of the objective function under three circumstances are analyzed for certain situations such as the shortage of coal mine accident costs or unreasonable scheduling allocation. In satisfying , and the unconstrained coordination time model This is due to the fact that the optimal solution is formed by the ordered weighted aggregation of the optimal adjustment values ​​of each decision maker; and There are differences at times, which are attributed to the constraints of coordination costs.

[0063] When consensus adjusts the scope When Optimal consensus decision making There is no adjustable range between them, so it degenerates into a model In the model Optimal solution and model There are also three situations: The optimal value of the model can be obtained accordingly.

[0064] Model The optimal solution Existence, when satisfied When So that: ; Optimal adjustment value for: ; Optimal value of objective function for: ; in, Obtained by looping through step S1042.

[0065] This result provides insight into the unconstrained coordination time model The optimal solution in coal mine accidents (i.e. the final consensus evaluation value after multiple decision experts make consensus decisions) ) and the optimal value of the objective function (i.e., the final consensus evaluation value), which concretizes the limited coordination resources and time urgency in coal mine accidents, and can reach a consensus in the shortest time, thus reflecting the time pressure in emergency decision-making. In an emergency, decision makers will selectively move closer to or moderately deviate from the center point based on their relative position to the center point in order to reach a consensus decision in a very short time. Considering the time urgency in coal mine accidents, when decision makers have different time sensitivities and there is a certain consensus adjustment range The model balances the coordination time sensitivity of all parties. , providing a solution that maximizes efficiency while ensuring fairness.

[0066] When consensus adjusts the scope When Optimal consensus decision making There is no adjustable range between them, so it degenerates into a model Its optimal solution and model Same, using The optimal value of the model can be obtained accordingly, but there is no optimal adjustment value because the final adjustment results of each decision maker are the same. Although it is difficult for all decision makers to reach complete agreement on their opinions, in order to achieve collective consensus, it is necessary to reach a final unanimous decision through mutual consultation when necessary.

[0067] Step S1044, loop to obtain the optimal consensus matrix. Loop through steps S1041 to S1043 to form the optimal consensus matrix .

[0068] Step S105: According to the optimal solution consensus matrix, the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution are weighted and aggregated and sorted, and the solution with the highest score is used as the optimal solution of the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

[0069] According to the parameters in step S1041 to step S1043 and Table 1 in the embodiment, a consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time is constructed, and the optimal consensus decision and the optimal value of the objective function are calculated for sudden water seepage accidents in coal mines under different scenarios. The final results are shown in Table 3.

[0070] Table 3 Model optimal consensus decision and optimal value

[0071] According to the preset attribute weights, the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution are weighted and aggregated for sorting and comparison. The solution with the highest score is the optimal solution decided by decision experts in various fields based on the actual situation consensus in this coal mine accident. The consensus decision-making schemes obtained in different scenarios in this embodiment are shown in Table 4.

[0072] Table 4 Consensus decision-making scheme

[0073] Unconstrained Coordination Time Model and Model Analysis of the optimal solution to this coal mine water seepage accident points to Solution 5. Specifically, by constructing a coordination time function, the process of the group quickly reaching a consensus on the decision-making plan is described, and only minimizing this function is used as the optimization goal to highlight the urgency of the initial time of the emergency. The evaluation system with a more focused timeliness reflects the collaborative efficiency of all participants in the emergency response, while the objective function design in the traditional consensus method is relatively general and lacks consideration of coordination time. In the context of coal mine accidents, especially in high-risk and high-urgency scenarios such as coal mine water seepage, the present invention provides a more scientific and reasonable basis for decision-making.

[0074] In order to further adapt to coal mine accidents in different situations, a constrained coordination time model was constructed. and Model The reason for the change in the results of the model is mainly the introduction of coordination cost constraints. The model not only reflects the urgency of time, but also takes coordination cost as a constraint. Traditional consensus methods often ignore or simplify coordination costs and lack analysis of consensus efficiency. The constrained model established is more suitable for describing situations with urgent time but cost constraints, such as the process of reaching consensus in the middle and late stages of coal mine accidents.

[0075] Simple analysis of coordination cost constraints M Model and The impact of the results, The optimal solution obtained is shown in Table 5.

[0076] Table 5 Adjustment M The optimal consensus solution after

[0077] Table 5 shows that M The optimal consensus solutions of the five schemes change in the three attribute dimensions. When , the optimal solution of the model is solution 1; when When , the optimal solution of the model becomes Solution 5. This shows that in this case, the coordination cost limit M Changes in will cause changes in the optimal decision-making plan, which means that coordination cost constraints will affect group consensus decisions to a certain extent.

[0078] Simple analysis of consensus Model and The impact of the results, The optimal solution obtained is shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3 and Table 6.

[0079] Table 6 Adjustment The optimal consensus solution after

[0080] Figure 2 The optimal consensus solutions of the five schemes are intuitively described in terms of the changes in the three attribute dimensions, where the arrows represent Table 6 shows that as The optimal consensus solution of the model will change to a certain extent, but the final optimal decision solution remains unchanged, that is, the model and The solutions are still maintained as Solution 1 and Solution 5. This shows that in this case, the degree of consensus The increase of will reduce the optimal consensus solution, which means that when decision makers expand the acceptable range of the solution, the consensus optimal solution is more likely to be biased towards a lower evaluation value; on the other hand, it shows that no matter how the consensus of each decision maker changes, The change in has little impact on the overall decision of this case, which is consistent with the stability of the model.

[0081] Traditional methods usually hide the time factor as one of the cost factors, especially the efficiency of the expert group reaching a consensus is difficult to reflect. The present invention proposes a nonlinear asymmetric coordination time function, and uses it as the optimization target to construct a consensus decision-making model under major emergencies, emphasizing the timeliness and urgency of teamwork. Traditional decision-making methods usually treat the time factor as a hidden cost factor, and fail to fully reflect the urgency of time in the decision-making process, especially when the expert group reaches a consensus, the efficiency is difficult to be effectively measured. By introducing this innovative time measurement method, the present invention can significantly improve the timeliness of the decision-making process while ensuring the quality of decision-making, ensuring that rapid and reasonable emergency decisions are made in emergency situations.

[0082] Aiming at different situations after coal mine accidents, the present invention establishes the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time with and without cost constraints. In the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time without cost constraints, decision experts, regardless of cost, take the shortest total coordination time as the main goal to express opinions and make decisions to obtain the optimal consensus solution. In the consensus decision model of the shortest coordination time with cost constraints, factors such as human cost, material cost and financial cost are taken into account. The decision-making process not only ensures the quality of decision-making, but also pays attention to practical feasibility. Through these two models, it is ensured that the emergency decision-making of coal mine accidents has both theoretical optimality and practical feasibility in implementation.

[0083] Embodiment 2 In this embodiment, if Figure 4 As shown, a multi-attribute consensus decision-making system for sudden accidents based on coordinated time is provided, which includes: The consensus adjustment parameter acquisition module 201 is used to acquire the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, which include consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost and consensus adjustment range; The coordination time and cost function construction module 202 is used to construct the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision expert based on the consensus tolerance of each decision expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval; and to construct the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision expert based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision expert; A consensus decision model building module 203 is used to analyze the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios according to the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, and then determine whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and build a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model; The optimal solution consensus matrix calculation module 204 is used to calculate the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency accident based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model and within the consensus adjustment range by using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes of each decision expert; The consensus optimal solution determination module 205 is used to weight and aggregate the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution according to the optimal solution consensus matrix and sort them, and use the solution with the highest score as the optimal solution of the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

[0084] It should be noted here that the various steps in the embodiment of the present invention correspond one-to-one to the various steps in the above-mentioned embodiment 1, and the specific implementation process is the same, which will not be described in detail here.

[0085] Embodiment 3 This embodiment provides a computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored. When the program is executed by a processor, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as described above are implemented.

[0086] Embodiment 4 This embodiment provides a computer program product, including a computer program / instruction, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as described above.

[0087] Embodiment 5 This embodiment provides an electronic device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the program, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as described above are implemented.

[0088] The present invention is described with reference to the flowcharts and / or block diagrams of the methods, devices (systems) and computer program products of the embodiments of the present invention. It should be understood that each process and / or block in the flowchart and / or block diagram and the combination of the processes and / or blocks in the flowchart and / or block diagram can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, an embedded processor or other programmable data processing device to produce a machine, so that the instructions executed by the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing device generate instructions for implementing the processes in the flowchart and / or block diagram. Figure 1 A process or multiple processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in a block or multiple blocks.

[0089] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. For those skilled in the art, the present invention may have various modifications and variations. Any modification, equivalent replacement, improvement, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention shall be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time, characterized in that: include: Obtain the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, which include consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost, and consensus adjustment range; Based on the consensus tolerance of each decision-making expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, the corresponding asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function of each decision-making expert is constructed; based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision-making expert, the corresponding coordination cost function of each decision-making expert is constructed; According to the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios are analyzed, and then it is determined whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model is constructed; Based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model, within the consensus adjustment range, the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency accident is calculated by using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by each decision expert; According to the optimal solution consensus matrix, the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution are weighted and aggregated and sorted, and the solution with the highest score is used as the optimal solution for the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

2. The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: No. A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on attributes The expression is: ； in, They represent the lower and upper absolute values ​​of the consensus tolerance range respectively; They represent the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment tolerance interval respectively; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes.

3. The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: In a consensus decision-making situation that emphasizes both coordination time efficiency and coordination cost control, j Scheme No. k The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time and cost constraints for this attribute is: ； in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

4. The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: When consensus adjusts the scope When Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time and cost constraints for this attribute is: ； in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first k Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates The unit decision adjustment cost of a decision expert; M represents the coordination cost limit; Indicates A decision expert The first Evaluation of properties; Indicates A decision expert The first k The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

5. The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: When the coordination cost constraint makes the coordination cost constraint When coordinating time as an important basis for decision-making in the early stages of an emergency, Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time without cost constraints for this attribute is: ； in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; Indicates the decision-making expert group's The first Consensus evaluation of species attributes; represents the number of decision-making experts; Indicates A decision expert The first The adjusted decision value of the attribute after the consensus process; For the The consensus adjustment range of decision experts; is the ordered weighted average operator; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix; For the The decision matrix after adjustment by the decision makers.

6. The multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time as claimed in claim 1 is characterized in that: When consensus adjusts the scope When Scheme No. The consensus decision model with the shortest coordination time without cost constraints for this attribute is: ； in, is the minimum value; Indicates constraints; is the objective function of the consensus process; Indicates A decision expert The first Asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function based on various attributes for decision making; represents the number of decision-making experts; is the feasible set of group consensus decision matrix; is the final consensus decision matrix.

7. A multi-attribute consensus decision-making system for sudden accidents based on coordinated time, characterized in that: include: A consensus adjustment parameter acquisition module, which is used to obtain the consensus adjustment parameters of each decision expert, including consensus tolerance, upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval, unit decision adjustment cost and consensus adjustment range; The coordination time and cost function construction module is used to construct the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function corresponding to each decision expert based on the consensus tolerance of each decision expert and the upper and lower bounds of the asymmetric adjustment allowable interval; and to construct the coordination cost function corresponding to each decision expert based on the unit decision adjustment cost of each decision expert; A consensus decision model building module is used to analyze the requirements for decision-making process and cost constraints in emergencies under different scenarios based on the asymmetric nonlinear coordination time function, and then determine whether to impose corresponding constraints on the coordination cost function, and build a corresponding shortest coordination time consensus decision model; The optimal solution consensus matrix calculation module is used to calculate the optimal solution consensus matrix of the emergency based on the shortest coordination time consensus decision model and within the consensus adjustment range, using the pre-built matrix evaluation values ​​of different attributes of different schemes by various decision experts; The consensus optimal solution determination module is used to weight and aggregate the optimal consensus decision values ​​of each solution according to the optimal solution consensus matrix and sort them, and use the solution with the highest score as the optimal solution for the consensus decision of each decision-making expert in the emergency accident.

8. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the program is executed by a processor, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time are implemented as described in any one of claims 1-6.

9. A computer program product comprising a computer program / instructions, characterized in that When the computer program / instruction is executed by a processor, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time are implemented as described in any one of claims 1-6.

10. An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that: When the processor executes the program, the steps in the multi-attribute consensus decision-making method for sudden accidents based on coordinated time are implemented as described in any one of claims 1-6.

Images