Advertisement

Soft Computing

, Volume 23, Issue 24, pp 13569–13589 | Cite as

A shape similarity-based ranking method of hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations using discrete fuzzy number for group decision making

  • Meng ZhaoEmail author
  • Meng-Ying Liu
  • Jia Su
  • Ting Liu
Methodologies and Application

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to develop a ranking method based on shape similarity applying to group decision-making problems. The proposed expressive method uses a symbolic representation to depict each membership function taking into account its shape characteristics and the relative length approximates on its X-axis segments. Considering the context of discrete fuzzy numbers, this paper employs the symbolic representation expressive method to represent the shape of membership function. The strategy of ranking is based on the similarity between unsorted evaluation and the “negative ideal” evaluation, and these evaluations have been depicted in symbolic representation basically. A signed similarity measure was carried at analyzing differences of the “negative ideal” one and unsorted one. The feasibility and applicability of the ranking method are illustrated with an example to give more details in this problem. Additionally, some comparative analyses are performed with other ranking methods combined with different fuzzy linguistic models (probabilistic linguistic term sets and hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets) to validate the flexibility and robustness of the proposed methodology.

Keywords

Group decision making Similarity measure Discrete fuzzy numbers Hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations Ranking method 

Notes

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71701037, 71701038, 71601041).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Baccour L, Alimi AM, John RI (2013) Similarity measures for intuitionistic fuzzy sets: State of the art. J Intell Fuzzy Syst Appl Eng Technol 24(1):37–491MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Bai Z (2013) Distance similarity measures for interval-valued hesitant fuzzy sets and their application in multicriteria decision making. Decis Syst 22(3):190–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bai C, Zhang R, Qian L, Wu Y (2017) Comparisons of probabilistic linguistic term sets for multi-criteria decision making. Knowl Based Syst 119:284–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E, Pedrycz W (2013) A method based on PSO and granular computing of linguistic information to solve group decision making problems defined in heterogeneous contexts. Eur J Oper Res 230(3):624–633MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cabrerizo FJ, Ureña MR, Pedrycz W, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) Building consensus in group decision making with an allocation of information granularity. Fuzzy Sets Syst 255:115–127MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cabrerizo FJ, Al-Hmouz R, Morfeq A, Balamash AS, Martínez MA, Herrera-Viedma E (2017) Soft consensus measures in group decision making using unbalanced fuzzy linguistic information. Soft Comput 21(11):3037–3050zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cabrerizo FJ, Morente-Molinera JA, Pedrycz W, Taghavi A, Herrera-Viedma E (2018) Granulating linguistic information in decision making under consensus and consistency. Expert Syst Appl 99:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capitaine HL (2012) A relevance-based learning model of fuzzy similarity measures. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(1):57–68MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casasnovas J, Riera JV (2011) Extension of discrete t-norms and t-conorms to discrete fuzzy numbers. FuzzySetsSyst 167(1):65–81MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen LH, Lu HW (2001) An approximate approach for ranking fuzzy numbers based on left and right dominance. Comput Math Appl 41(12):1589–1602MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheng SH, Chen SM, Huang ZC (2016) Autocratic decision making using group recommendations based on ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 361–362:135–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. del Moral MJ, Chiclana F, Tapia JM, Herrera-Viedma E (2018) A comparative study on consensus measures in group decision making. Int J Intell Syst 33(8):1624–1638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dice LR (1945a) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26(3):297–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dice LR (1945b) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26:297–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dong Y, Chen X, Herrera F (2014) Minimizing adjusted simple terms in the consensus reaching process with hesitant linguistic assessments in group decision making. Inf Sci 297:95–117MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eshragh F, Mamdani E (1979) A general approach to linguistic approximation. Int J Man Mach Stud 11:501–519MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gou XJ, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2017a) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic entropy and cross-entropy measures and alternative queuing method for multiple criteria decision making. Inf Sci 388–389:225–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gou XJ, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2017b) Multiple criteria decision making based on Bonferroni means with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. Soft Comput 21:6515–6529zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gusfield D (1997) Algorithms on strings, trees, and sequences: computer science and computational biology. Cambridge University Press, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E (2000) Choice functions and mechanisms for linguistic preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 120(1):144–161MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Herrera F, Martinez L (2000) A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 8(6):746–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay JL (1994) Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic OWA operators. Fuzzy Sets Syst 79:175–190MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Martínez L (2008) A fuzzy linguistic methodology to deal with unbalanced linguistic term sets. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 16(2):354–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herrera-Viedma E, Riera JV, Massanet S, Torrens J (2014) Some remarks on the fuzzy linguistic model based on discrete fuzzy numbers. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE international conference on intelligent systems, vol 322, pp 319–330Google Scholar
  25. Jaccard P (1908) Nouvelles Recherches Sur la Distribution Florale. Bull De La Soc Vaudoise Des Sci Nat 44(163):223–270Google Scholar
  26. Johanyák ZC, Kovács S (2009) Distance based similarity measures of fuzzy sets. Proc SAMI 9:265–276Google Scholar
  27. Lee-Kwang H, Song YS, Lee KM (1994) Similarity measure between fuzzy sets and between elements. Fuzzy Sets Syst 62(3):291–293MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liao H, Xu Z (2015) Approaches to manage hesitant fuzzy linguistic information based on the cosine distance and similarity measures for HFLTSs and their application in qualitative decision making. Expert Syst Appl 42(12):5328–5336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liao HC, Xu ZS, Zeng XJ (2014) Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making. Inf Sci 271:125–142MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liao H, Xu Z, Zeng XJ, Xu DL (2015a) An enhanced consensus reaching process in group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Inf Sci 329(C):274–286Google Scholar
  31. Liao HC, Xu ZS, Zeng XJ, Merigó JM (2015b) Qualitative decision making with correlation coefficients of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Knowl Based Syst 76:127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liao H, Xu Z, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F (2018) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application in decision making: a state-of-the-art survey. Int J Fuzzy Syst 20(7):2084–2110MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu W, Dong Y, Chiclana F, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2017) Group decision-making based on heterogeneous preference relations with self-confidence. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 16(4):429–447MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Martínez L, Herrera F (2012) An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: extensions, applications and challenges. Inf Sci 207:1–18MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mas M, Monserrat M, Torrens J (2014) Kernel aggregation functions on finite scales. Constructions from their marginal. Fuzzy Sets Syst 241(8):27–40MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Massanet S, Riera JV, Torrens J, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) A new linguistic computational model based on discrete fuzzy numbers for computing with words. Inf Sci 258:277–290MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Massanet S, Vicente Riera J, Torrens J et al (2016) A model based on subjective linguistic preference relations for group decision making problems. Inf Sci Int J 355(5):249–264Google Scholar
  38. Matarazzo B, Munda G (1996) New approaches for the comparison of L-R fuzzy numbers: a theoretical and operational analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 118(3):407–418MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meng FY, Chen XH (2015) A hesitant fuzzy linguistic multi-granularity decision making model based on distance measures. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 28(4):1519–1531MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Morente-Molinera JA, Perez IJ, Ureña MR et al (2015) On multi-granular fuzzy linguistic modeling in group decision making problems: a systematic review and future trends. Knowl Based Syst 74(1):49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morente-Molinera JA, Mezei J, Carlsson C, Herrera-Viedma E (2017) Improving supervised learning classification methods using multi-granular linguistic modelling and fuzzy entropy. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 25(5):1078–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pang Q, Wang H, Xu Z (2016) Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Inf Sci 369:128–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Perez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010) A mobile decision support system for dynamic group decision-making problems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 40(6):1244–1256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2011) Group decision making problems in a linguistic and dynamic context. Expert Syst Appl 38(3):1675–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Perez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Alonso S, Dong YC, Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E (2018) On dynamic consensus processes in group decision making problems. Inf Sci 459:20–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Riera JV, Torrens J (2012) Aggregation of subjective evaluations based on discrete fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 191:21–40MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Riera JV, Torrens J (2014) Aggregation functions on the set of discrete fuzzy numbers defined from a pair of discrete aggregations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 241(241):76–93MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Riera JV, Torrens J (2015) Using discrete fuzzy numbers in the aggregation of incomplete qualitative information. FuzzySetsSyst 264:121–137MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. Riera JV, Massanet S, Herrera-Viedma E, Torrens J (2015) Some interesting properties of the fuzzy linguistic model based on discrete fuzzy numbers to manage hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. Appl Soft Comput 36:383–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rodriguez R, Martinez L, Herrera F (2012) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(1):109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rodríguez RM, Martínez L, Herrera F (2013) A group decision making model dealing with comparative linguistic expressions based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Inf Sci 241:28–42MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tapia-Rosero A, Bronselaer A, Tré GD (2014) A method based on shape-similarity for detecting similar opinions in group decision-making. Inf Sci 258(258):291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Turksen IB (2002) Type 2 representation and reasoning for CWW. Fuzzy Sets Syst 127:17–36MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tversky D (1977) Features of similarities. Psychol Rev 84:327–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tversky A (1988) Features of similarity. Read Cogn Sci 84(4):290–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Voxman W (2001) Canonical representations of discrete fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 118(3):457–466MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wang JQ, Wu JT, Wang J et al (2016) Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on the Hausdorff distance of hesitant fuzzy linguistic numbers. Soft Comput 20(4):1621–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wei C, Zhao N, Tang X (2014) Operators and Comparisons of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22:575–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Xu Z, Xia M (2011) Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 181(11):2128–2138MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Xuecheng L (1992) Entropy, distance measure and similarity measure of fuzzy sets and their relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 52(3):305–318MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yager R (1981) A new methodology for ordinal multiobjective decisions based on fuzzy sets. Decis Sci 12:589–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zadeh LA (1971) Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings. Inf Sci 3(2):177–200MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zhang H, Yu L (2013) New distance measures between intuitionistic fuzzy sets and interval-valued fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 245(10):181–196MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zhang H, Dong Y, Herrera-Viedma E (2017) Consensus building for the heterogeneous large-scale GDM with the individual concerns and satisfactions. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(2):884–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zwick R, Carlstein E, Budescu DV (1987) Measures of similarity among fuzzy concepts: a comparative analysis. Int J Approx Reason 1(2):221–242MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business AdministrationNortheastern UniversityShenyangChina
  2. 2.Northeastern University at QinhuangdaoQinhuangdaoChina
  3. 3.School of Public AffairsZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina
  4. 4.College of Management and EconomicsTianjin UniversityTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations