Advertisement

A new last aggregation method of multi-attributes group decision making based on concepts of TODIM, WASPAS and TOPSIS under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertainty

  • R. Davoudabadi
  • S. Meysam MousaviEmail author
  • V. Mohagheghi
Regular Paper
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Due to the complexity of decision making under uncertainty and the existence of various and often conflicting criteria, several methods have been proposed to facilitate decision making, and fuzzy logic has been used successfully to address this issue. This paper presents a new framework for solving multi-attributes group decision-making problems under fuzzy environments. The proposed algorithm has several features. First of all, the TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese for interactive multi-criteria decision making) method under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertainty is employed. Moreover, objective and subjective weights for each decision maker are used to address this last aggregation approach. To consider weights of attributes, knowledge measure in addition to a new mathematical approach is introduced. A new aggregation and ranking method based on the WASPAS and TOPSIS methods, namely WT method, is presented and applied in this paper. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed framework is shown by comparing the results with two different real-world applications in the literature.

Keywords

Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IVIFSs) Multi-attributes group decision-making (MAGDM) problems TODIM WASPAS TOPSIS Objective and subjective weights Last aggregation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank anonymous referees for their valuable comments and recommendations on this paper.

Author contributions

The authors of this research confirm the change in authorship based on their contributions in the revised version.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required as no human or animals were involved.

Human and animal rights

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Atanassov K, Gargov G (1989) Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 31:343–349MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banaeian N, Mobli H, Fahimnia B, Nielsen IE, Omid M (2018) Green supplier selection using fuzzy group decision making methods: a case study from the agri-food industry. Comput Oper Res 89:337–347MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baykasoğlu A, Gölcük İ (2017) Development of an interval type-2 fuzzy sets based hierarchical MADM model by combining DEMATEL and TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 70:37–51Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beliakov G, Pradera A, Calvo T (2007) Aggregation functions: a guide for practitioners, vol 221. Springer, HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Büyüközkan G, Göçer F (2017) Application of a new combined intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM approach based on axiomatic design methodology for the supplier selection problem. Appl Soft Comput 52:1222–1238Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Büyüközkan G, Göçer F (2017) Smart medical device selection based on interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy VIKOR. In: Advances in fuzzy logic and technology 2017. Springer, Cham, pp 306–317Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Büyüközkan G, Güleryüz S (2016) Multi criteria group decision making approach for smart phone selection using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Int J Comput Intell Syst 9(4):709–725Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen TY (2015) IVIF-PROMETHEE outranking methods for multiple criteria decision analysis based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 14(2):173–198MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Das S, Dutta B, Guha D (2016) Weight computation of criteria in a decision-making problem by knowledge measure with intuitionistic fuzzy set and interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy set. Soft Comput 20(9):3421–3442zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garg H (2016) A new generalized improved score function of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and applications in expert systems. Appl Soft Comput 38:988–999Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gitinavard H, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2017) Soft computing-based new interval-valued hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria group assessment method with last aggregation to industrial decision problems. Soft Comput 21(12):3247–3265zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gomes LFAM (2009) An application of the TODIM method to the multicriteria rental evaluation of residential properties. Eur J Oper Res 193(1):204–211zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gomes LFAM, Lima MMPP (1992) TODIM: basics and application to multicriteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts. Found Comput Decis Sci 16(4):113–127zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hajighasemi Z, Mousavi SM (2018) A new approach in failure modes and effects analysis based on compromise solution by considering objective and subjective weights with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Iran J Fuzzy Syst 15(1):139–161MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hashemi H, Bazargan J, Mousavi SM (2013) A compromise ratio method with an application to water resources management: an intuitionistic fuzzy set. Water Resour Manag 27:2029–2051Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: a state of the art survey. In: Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, vol 186Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jato-Espino D, Castillo-Lopez E, Rodriguez-Hernandez J, Canteras-Jordana JC (2014) A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction. Autom Constr 45:151–162Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Keshavarz Ghorabaee M (2016) Developing an MCDM method for robot selection with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 37:221–232Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Keshavarz Ghorabaee M, Amiri M, Sadaghiani JS, Goodarzi GH (2014) Multiple criteria group decision-making for supplier selection based on COPRAS method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 75(5–8):1115–1130Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Keshavarz Ghorabaee M, Zavadskas EK, Amiri M, Esmaeili A (2016) Multi-criteria evaluation of green suppliers using an extended WASPAS method with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. J Clean Prod 137:213–229Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krohling RA, Pacheco AG (2014) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy TODIM. Procedia Comput Sci 31:236–244Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Krohling RA, Pacheco AG, Siviero AL (2013) IF-TODIM: an intuitionistic fuzzy TODIM to multi-criteria decision making. Knowl Based Syst 53:142–146Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li DF (2011) Extension principles for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and algebraic operations. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 10(1):45–58MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu HC, Ren ML, Wu J, Lin QL (2014) An interval 2-tuple linguistic MCDM method for robot evaluation and selection. Int J Prod Res 52(10):2867–2880Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liu W, Li L (2015) An approach to determining the integrated weights of decision makers based on interval number group decision matrices. Knowl Based Syst 90:92–98Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lourenzutti R, Krohling RA (2013) A study of TODIM in a intuitionistic fuzzy and random environment. Expert Syst Appl 40(16):6459–6468Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Siadat A (2016) Best product end-of-life scenario selection by a new decision-making process under Atanassov fuzzy uncertainty. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on management of innovation and technology (ICMIT), pp 313–317Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Aghamohagheghi M, Vahdani B (2017) A new approach of multi-criteria analysis for the evaluation and selection of sustainable transport investment projects under uncertainty: a case study. Int J Comput Intell Syst 10(1):605–626Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mohagheghi V, Mousavi SM, Vahdani B, Shahriari MR (2017) R&D project evaluation and project portfolio selection by a new interval type-2 fuzzy optimization approach. Neural Comput Appl 28(12):3869–3888Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mousavi SM, Vahdani B, Sadigh Behzadi S (2016) Designing a model of intuitionistic fuzzy VIKOR in multi-attribute group decision-making problems. Iran J Fuzzy Syst 13(1):45–65MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mousavi SM, Vahdani B (2016) Cross-docking location selection in distribution systems: a new intuitionistic fuzzy hierarchical decision model. Int J Comput Intell Syst 9(1):91–109Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mousavi-Nasab SH, Sotoudeh-Anvari A (2017) A comprehensive MCDM-based approach using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an auxiliary tool for material selection problems. Mater Des 121:237–253Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nassereddine M, Eskandari H (2017) An integrated MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation systems in Tehran. Transp Res Part A Policy Pract 106:427–439Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nayagam VLG, Jeevaraj S, Dhanasekaran P (2017) An intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method based on non-hesitance score for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Soft Comput 21(23):7077–7082zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Onat NC, Gumus S, Kucukvar M, Tatari O (2016) Application of the TOPSIS and intuitionistic fuzzy set approaches for ranking the life cycle sustainability performance of alternative vehicle technologies. Sustain Prod Consum 6:12–25Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Otay İ, Oztaysi B, Onar SC, Kahraman C (2017) Multi-expert performance evaluation of healthcare institutions using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy AHP&DEA methodology. Knowl Based Syst 133:90–106Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pal NR, Bustince H, Pagola M, Mukherjee UK, Goswami DP, Beliakov G (2013) Uncertainties with Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy sets: fuzziness and lack of knowledge. Inf Sci 228:61–74MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Qin J, Liu X, Pedrycz W (2017) An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Eur J Oper Res 258(2):626–638MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Qin Q, Liang F, Li L, Chen YW, Yu GF (2017) A TODIM-based multi-criteria group decision making with triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. Appl Soft Comput 55:93–107Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ren P, Xu Z, Liao H, Zeng XJ (2017) A thermodynamic method of intuitionistic fuzzy MCDM to assist the hierarchical medical system in China. Inf Sci 420:490–504Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rostamzadeh R, Keshavarz Ghorabaee M, Govindan K, Esmaeili A, Nobar HBK (2018) Evaluation of sustainable supply chain risk management using an integrated fuzzy TOPSIS-CRITIC approach. J Clean Prod 175:651–669Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sen DK, Datta S, Mahapatra SS (2015) Extension of TODIM combined with grey numbers: an integrated decision making module. Grey Syst Theory Appl 5(3):367–391Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vahdani B, Mousavi SM, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Ghodratnama A, Mohammadi M (2014) Robot selection by a multiple criteria complex proportional assessment method under an interval-valued fuzzy environment. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73(5–8):687–697Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vinodh S, Balagi TS, Patil A (2016) A hybrid MCDM approach for agile concept selection using fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83(9–12):1979–1987Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wang P, Zhu Z, Wang Y (2016) A novel hybrid MCDM model combining the SAW, TOPSIS and GRA methods based on experimental design. Inf Sci 345:27–45Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wei C, Ren Z, Rodríguez RM (2015) A hesitant fuzzy linguistic TODIM method based on a score function. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(4):701–712Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wei GW, Wang HJ, Lin R (2011) Application of correlation coefficient to interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making with incomplete weight information. Knowl Inf Syst 26(2):337–349Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ye F (2010) An extended TOPSIS method with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers for virtual enterprise partner selection. Expert Syst Appl 37(10):7050–7055Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Yu SM, Wang J, Wang JQ (2018) An extended TODIM approach with intuitionistic linguistic numbers. Int Trans Oper Res 25(3):781–805MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zavadskas EK, Antucheviciene J, Hajiagha SHR, Hashemi SS (2014) Extension of weighted aggregated sum product assessment with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (WASPAS-IVIF). Appl Soft Comput 24:1013–1021Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Antucheviciene J, Zakarevicius A (2012) Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment/Svorinio agreguoto alternatyviu sprendimu vertinimo optimizavimas. Elektronika ir elektrotechnika 122(6):3–6Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Zhang X, Xu Z (2015) Soft computing based on maximizing consensus and fuzzy topsis approach to interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making. Appl Soft Comput 26:42–56Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zhao H, Xu Z, Yao Z (2016) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy derivative and differential operations. Int J Comput Intell Syst 9(1):36–56Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Davoudabadi
    • 1
  • S. Meysam Mousavi
    • 1
    Email author
  • V. Mohagheghi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringShahed UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations