A two-step fusion process for multi-criteria decision applied to natural hazards in mountains

TL;DR

This paper introduces a two-step fusion process combining AHP and belief function theories to improve decision-making in natural hazard risk assessment in mountainous regions, addressing conflicting information and uncertainty.

Contribution

It presents a novel methodology integrating AHP with belief function theories for multi-criteria decision-making under uncertainty in natural hazard management.

Findings

Effective transformation of criteria using Fuzzy Sets and Possibilities.

Improved conflict management in belief function fusion.

Enhanced decision validation in natural hazard contexts.

Abstract

Mountain river torrents and snow avalanches generate human and material damages with dramatic consequences. Knowledge about natural phenomenona is often lacking and expertise is required for decision and risk management purposes using multi-disciplinary quantitative or qualitative approaches. Expertise is considered as a decision process based on imperfect information coming from more or less reliable and conflicting sources. A methodology mixing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a multi-criteria aid-decision method, and information fusion using Belief Function Theory is described. Fuzzy Sets and Possibilities theories allow to transform quantitative and qualitative criteria into a common frame of discernment for decision in Dempster-Shafer Theory (DST ) and Dezert-Smarandache Theory (DSmT) contexts. Main issues consist in basic belief assignments elicitation, conflict identification and management, fusion rule choices, results validation but also in specific needs to make a difference between importance and reliability and uncertainty in the fusion process.