Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 27, Issue 3, pp 727–737 | Cite as

TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment

  • Pranab BiswasEmail author
  • Surapati Pramanik
  • Bibhas C. Giri
Original Article


A single-valued neutrosophic set is a special case of neutrosophic set. It has been proposed as a generalization of crisp sets, fuzzy sets, and intuitionistic fuzzy sets in order to deal with incomplete information. In this paper, a new approach for multi-attribute group decision-making problems is proposed by extending the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution to single-valued neutrosophic environment. Ratings of alternative with respect to each attribute are considered as single-valued neutrosophic set that reflect the decision makers’ opinion based on the provided information. Neutrosophic set characterized by three independent degrees namely truth-membership degree (T), indeterminacy-membership degree (I), and falsity-membership degree (F) is more capable to catch up incomplete information. Single-valued neutrosophic set-based weighted averaging operator is used to aggregate all the individual decision maker’s opinion into one common opinion for rating the importance of criteria and alternatives. Finally, an illustrative example is provided in order to demonstrate its applicability and effectiveness of the proposed approach.


Fuzzy set Intuitionistic fuzzy set Multi-attribute group decision-making Neutrosophic set Single-valued neutrosophic set TOPSIS 


  1. 1.
    Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brans JP, Vinvke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24:228–238MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156:445–455CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Roy B (1991) The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory Decis 31:49–73MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114:1–9CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:87–96MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boran FE, Genc S, Kurt M, Akay D (2009) A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS method. Expert Syst Appl 36(8):11363–11368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pramanik S, Mukhopadhyaya D (2011) Grey relational analysis based intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making approach for teacher selection in higher education. Int J Comput Appl 34(10):21–29Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Smarandache F (1999) A unifying field in logics. Neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, RehobothzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 4:410–413zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ye J (2013) Multicriteria decision-making method using the correlation coefficient under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Int J Gen Syst 42(4):386–394MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ye J (2013) Single valued neutrosophic cross entropy for multicriteria decision making problems. Appl Math Model 38:1170–1175MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014) Entropy based grey relational analysis method for multi-attribute decision-making under single valued neutrosophic assessments. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 2:102–110Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014) A new methodology for neutrosophic multi-attribute decision making with unknown weight information. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 3:42–52Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhang HY, Wang JQ, Chen XH (2014) Interval neutrosophic sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making problems. Sci World J. doi: 10.1155/2014/645953
  17. 17.
    Ye J (2014) A multi-criteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:2459–2466zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chi P, Liu P (2013) An extended TOPSIS method for the multi-attribute decision making problems on interval neutrosophic set. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 1:63–70Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rivieccio U (2008) Neutrosophic logics: prospects and problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:1860–1868MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghaderi SF, Azadeh A, Nokhandan BP, Fathi E (2012) Behavioral simulation and optimization of generation companies in electrical markets by fuzzy cognitive map. Expert Syst Appl 39:4635–4646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smarandache F (2005) Neutrosophic set: a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set. Int J Pure Appl Math 24:287–297MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu P, Wang Y (2014) Multiple attribute decision making method based on single-valued neutrosophic normalized weighted Bonferroni mean. Neural Comput Appl 25:2001–2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Majumdar P, Samanta SK (2013) On similarity and entropy of neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst. doi: 10.3233/IFS-130810
  24. 24.
    Dezert J (2002) Open questions in neutrosophic inferences. Mult Valued Log Intern J 8:439–472MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pranab Biswas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Surapati Pramanik
    • 2
  • Bibhas C. Giri
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsNandalal Ghosh B.T CollegePanpur, NarayanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations