Advertisement

A novel spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its renewable energy application

  • 173 Accesses

Abstract

The extensions of ordinary fuzzy sets such as intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Pythagorean fuzzy sets, and neutrosophic sets, whose membership functions are based on three dimensions, aim at collecting experts’ judgments more informatively and explicitly. In the literature, generalized three-dimensional spherical fuzzy sets have been introduced by Kutlu Gündoğdu and Kahraman (J Intell Fuzzy Syst 36(1):337–352, 2019a), including their arithmetic operations, aggregation operators, and defuzzification operations. In this paper, our aim is to extend classical analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to spherical fuzzy AHP (SF-AHP) method and to show its applicability and validity through a renewable energy location selection example and a comparative analysis between neutrosophic AHP and SF-AHP.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Sangaiah AK (2018) Neutrosophic AHP-Delphi Group decision making model based on trapezoidal neutrosophic numbers. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 9(5):1427–1443

  2. Arqub OA (2016) The reproducing kernel algorithm for handling differential algebraic systems of ordinary differential equations. Math Methods Appl Sci 39(15):4549–4562

  3. Arqub OA (2017) Adaptation of reproducing kernel algorithm for solving fuzzy Fredholm–Volterra integrodifferential equations. Neural Comput Appl 28(7):1591–1610

  4. Arqub OA, Mohammed AS, Momani S, Hayat T (2016) Numerical solutions of fuzzy differential equations using reproducing kernel Hilbert space method. Soft Comput 20(8):3283–3302

  5. Arqub OA, Al-Smadi M, Momani S, Hayat T (2017) Application of reproducing kernel algorithm for solving second-order, two-point fuzzy boundary value problems. Soft Comput 21(23):7191–7206

  6. Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96

  7. Atanassov KT (2016) Geometrical interpretation of the elements of the intuitionistic fuzzy objects Preprint IM-MFAIS (1989) 1-89, Sofia. Reprinted: Int J Bioautomation 20(S1):27–42

  8. Bolturk E, Kahraman C (2018) A novel interval-valued neutrosophic AHP with cosine similarity measure. Soft Comput 1:1–8

  9. Boltürk E, Çevik Onar S, Öztayşi B, Kahraman C, Goztepe K (2016) Multi-attribute warehouse location selection in humanitarian logistics using hesitant fuzzy AHP. Int J Anal Hierarchy Process 8:271–298

  10. Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247

  11. 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):3037–3050

  12. Capuano N, Chiclana F, Fujita H, Herrera-Viedma E, Loia V (2017) Fuzzy group decision making with incomplete information guided by social influence. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(3):1704–1718

  13. Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95(3):649–655

  14. Cheng SH, Chen SM, Huang ZC (2016) Autocratic decision making using group recommendations based on ranking interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 361:135–161

  15. Chiao KP (2016) The multi-criteria group decision making methodology using type 2 fuzzy linguistic judgments. Appl Soft Comput 49:189–211

  16. Garibaldi JM, Ozen T (2007) Uncertain fuzzy reasoning: a case study in modelling expert decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 15(1):16–30

  17. Gim B, Kim JW (2014) Multi-criteria evaluation of hydrogen storage systems for automobiles in Korea using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Int J Hydrog Energy 39(15):7852–7858

  18. Grattan-Guinness I (1976) Fuzzy membership mapped onto intervals and many-valued quantities. Math Logic Q 22(1):149–160

  19. Ilbahar E, Karaşan A, Cebi S, Kahraman C (2018) A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and fuzzy inference system. Saf Sci 103:124–136

  20. Jahn KU (1975) Intervall-wertige Mengen. Mathematische Nachrichten 68(1):115–132

  21. Jin F, Ni Z, Chen H, Li Y (2016) Approaches to group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations based on multiplicative consistency. Knowl Based Syst 97:48–59

  22. Kahraman C, Kaya İ (2010) A fuzzy multicriteria methodology for selection among energy alternatives. Expert Syst Appl 37(9):6270–6281

  23. Kahraman C, Öztayşi B, Sarı İU, Turanoğlu E (2014) Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Knowl Based Syst 59:48–57

  24. Kahraman C, Öztayşi B, Onar SÇ, Boltürk E (2018) Neutrosophic AHP and prioritization of legal service outsourcing firms/law offices. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 15(02):1176–1183

  25. Kaya İ, Öztayşi B, Kahraman C (2012) A two-phased fuzzy multicriteria selection among public transportation investments for policy-making and risk governance. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 20(supp01):31–48

  26. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C, Civan HN (2018) A novel hesitant fuzzy EDAS method and its application to hospital selection. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 35(6):6353–6365

  27. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C (2019a) Spherical fuzzy sets and spherical fuzzy TOPSIS method. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 36(1):337–352

  28. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C (2019b) Extension of WASPAS with spherical fuzzy sets. Informatica 30(2):269–292

  29. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C (2019c) A novel VIKOR method using spherical fuzzy sets and its application to warehouse site selection. J Intell Fuzzy Syst. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-182651

  30. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C (2019d) A novel fuzzy TOPSIS method using emerging interval-valued spherical fuzzy sets. Eng Appl Artif Intell 85:307–323

  31. Liu W, Dong Y, Chiclana F, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2017a) Group decision-making based on heterogeneous preference relations with self-confidence. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 16(4):429–447

  32. Liu Z, Liu P, Liu W, Pang J (2017b) Pythagorean uncertain linguistic partitioned Bonferroni mean operators and their application in multi-attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(3):2779–2790

  33. Ozgen D, Gulsun B (2014) Combining possibilistic linear programming and fuzzy AHP for solving the multi-objective capacitated multi-facility location problem. Inf Sci 268:185–201

  34. Oztaysi B, Onar SC, Kahraman C (2017) Prioritization of business analytics projects using interval type-2 fuzzy AHP. In Advances in fuzzy logic and technology. Springer, Cham, pp 106–117

  35. Öztaysi B, Onar SÇ, Boltürk E, Kahraman C (2015) Hesitant fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. In 2015 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE). IEEE, pp 1–7

  36. Rezaei J, Fahim PB, Tavasszy L (2014) Supplier selection in the airline retail industry using a funnel methodology: conjunctive screening method and fuzzy AHP. Expert Syst Appl 41(18):8165–8179

  37. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resources allocation. McGraw-Hill Inc. http://www.mendeley.com/research/the-analytic-hierarchy-process. Accessed 31 Aug 2018

  38. Sambuc R (1975) Function Φ-Flous, Application a l’aide au Diagnostic en Pathologie Thyroidienne. University of Marseille

  39. Smarandache F (1999) A unifying field in logics neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, Rehoboth, pp 1–141

  40. Smarandache F (2003) Definition of neutrosophic logic: a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy logic. In: Proceedings of the third conference of the European society for fuzzy logic and technology, EUSFLAT 2003, September 10–12, 2003, Zittau, Germany. University of Applied Sciences at Zittau, Goerlitz pp 141–146

  41. Tan RR, Aviso KB, Huelgas AP, Promentilla MA (2014) Fuzzy AHP approach to selection problems in process engineering involving quantitative and qualitative aspects. Process Saf Environ Prot 92(5):467–475

  42. Tooranloo HS, Iranpour A (2017) Supplier selection and evaluation using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP method. Int J Procure Manag 10(5):539–554

  43. Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(6):529–539

  44. Van Laarhoven PJ, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1–3):229–241

  45. Wan SP, Wang F, Lin LL, Dong JY (2016) Some new generalized aggregation operators for triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and application to multi-attribute group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 93:286–301

  46. Wang H, Xu Z (2016) Total orders of extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets: definitions, generations and applications. Knowl Based Syst 107:142–154

  47. Wu J, Huang HB, Cao QW (2013) Research on AHP with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and its application in multi-criteria decision making problems. Appl Math Model 37(24):9898–9906

  48. Yager RR (1986) On the theory of bags. Int J General Syst 13(1):23–37

  49. Yager RR (2013) Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In 2013 Joint IFSA world congress and NAFIPS annual meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS). IEEE, pp 57–61

  50. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353

  51. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning. Part I. Inf Sci 8:199–249

  52. Zeng J, An M, Smith NJ (2007) Application of a fuzzy based decision making methodology to construction project risk assessment. Int J Project Manag 25(6):589–600

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Cengiz Kahraman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Communicated by V. Loia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kutlu Gündoğdu, F., Kahraman, C. A novel spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its renewable energy application. Soft Comput (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04222-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • Spherical fuzzy sets
  • Multi-criteria decision making
  • AHP
  • Neutrosophic AHP