Feasible strategies in three-way conflict analysis with three-valued ratings
Jing Liu, Mengjun Hu, Guangming Lang
TL;DR
This work advances three-way conflict analysis with three-valued ratings by developing both weighted consistency and weighted non-consistency frameworks. It defines a comprehensive set of measures, including $R(G,t)$, $ ext{CM}(G,t)$, and $ ext{NM}(G,t)$, that incorporate agent and issue weights, and provides algorithms to identify $L$-order feasible and optimal feasible strategies under both perspectives. The approach is validated on NBA labor negotiations and Gansu Province development plans, with extensive sensitivity analyses and comparisons to Xu's model and ten other conflict-analysis methods, demonstrating improved feasibility and higher consistency. The results show that integrating weights and dual perspectives yields robust, practical strategies for conflict resolution with clear theoretical and empirical benefits, informing real-world decision-making and policy design.
Abstract
Most existing work on three-way conflict analysis has focused on trisecting agent pairs, agents, or issues, which contributes to understanding the nature of conflicts but falls short in addressing their resolution. Specifically, the formulation of feasible strategies, as an essential component of conflict resolution and mitigation, has received insufficient scholarly attention. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate feasible strategies from two perspectives of consistency and non-consistency. Particularly, we begin with computing the overall rating of a clique of agents based on positive and negative similarity degrees. Afterwards, considering the weights of both agents and issues, we propose weighted consistency and non-consistency measures, which are respectively used to identify the feasible strategies for a clique of agents. Algorithms are developed to identify feasible strategies, $L$-order feasible strategies, and the corresponding optimal ones. Finally, to demonstrate the practicality, effectiveness, and superiority of the proposed models, we apply them to two commonly used case studies on NBA labor negotiations and development plans for Gansu Province and conduct a sensitivity analysis on parameters and a comparative analysis with existing state-of-the-art conflict analysis approaches. The comparison results demonstrate that our conflict resolution models outperform the conventional approaches by unifying weighted agent-issue evaluation with consistency and non-consistency measures to enable the systematic identification of not only feasible strategies but also optimal solutions.