Advertisement

TODIM-based multi-criteria decision-making method with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets

  • Mingwei LinEmail author
  • Huibing Wang
  • Zeshui Xu
Article
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

As a popular tool for modeling the qualitative assessment information, the hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTSs) can allow the decision makes or experts to give several possible linguistic terms to rate the objects with respect to the criterion. Although there exist many multi-criteria decision-making methods put forward for handling the HFLTSs, they were developed based on the assumption that the decision makers can always provide completely rational assessments and they do not take the decision makers’ psychological behaviors into consideration. In this paper, the traditional TODIM (an acronym in Portuguese for interactive multi-criteria decision making) method is extended to handle the HFLTSs based on the novel comparison function and distance measure. Firstly, we put forward a novel function for comparing two HFLTSs more effectively. After that, a novel hesitance degree function as well as some novel distance measures are given for HFLTSs. Then we apply them to extend the traditional TODIM method for solving the HFLTSs. Finally, a practical example concerning the evaluation and ranking of several satellite launching centers is provided to illustrate the validity and applicability of the proposed method.

Keywords

TODIM Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set Probabilistic linguistic term sets Distance measure 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 61872086, U1805263, and 61672157, and the Distinguished Young Scientific Research Talents Plan in Universities of Fujian Province (2017).

References

  1. Anisseh M, Piri F, Shahraki MR, Agamohamadi F (2012) Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS model for group decision making under multiple criteria. Artif Intell Rev 38(4):325–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beg I, Rashid T (2013) TOPSIS for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 28(12):1162–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Budak A, Ustundag A (2015) Fuzzy decision making model for selection of real time location systems. Appl Soft Comput 36:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Camerer C (1998) Bounded rationality in individual decision making. Exp Econ 1(2):163–183zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duckstein L, Opricovic S (1980) Multiobjective optimization in river basin development. Water Resour Res 16(1):14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer, BerlinzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ji P, Zhang H-Y, Wang J-Q (2016) A projection-based TODIM method under multi-valued neutrosophic environments and its application in personnel selection. Neural Comput Appl 29(1):221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Joshi R, Kumar S (2018) A dissimilarity Jensen–Shannon divergence measure for intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 33(11):2216–2235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krohling RA, Pacheco AGC, Siviero ALT (2013) IF-TODIM: an intuitionistic fuzzy TODIM to multi-criteria decision making. Knowl-Based Syst 53:142–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee LW, Chen SM (2015) Fuzzy decision making based on likelihood-based comparison relations of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and hesitant fuzzy linguistic operators. Inf Sci 294:513–529MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li DQ, Zeng WY, Li JH (2015) New distance and similarity measures on hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications in multiple criteria decision making. Eng Appl Artif Intell 40:11–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liao HC, Xu ZS (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
  17. Liao HC, Xu ZS, Zeng XJ (2015) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic VIKOR method and its application in qualitative multiple criteria decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(5):1343–1355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liao HC, Yang LY, Xu ZS (2018) Two new approaches based on ELECTRE II to solve the multiple criteria decision making problems with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Appl Soft Comput J 63:223–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lin MW, Xu ZS, Zhai YL, Yao ZQ (2018a) Multi-attribute group decision-making under probabilistic uncertain linguistic environment. J Oper Res Soc 69(2):157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin M, Wei J, Xu Z, Chen R (2018) Multiattribute group decision-making based on linguistic pythagorean fuzzy interaction partitioned bonferroni mean aggregation operators. Complexity 2018:9531064Google Scholar
  21. Lin MW, Chen ZY, Liao HC, Xu ZS (2019) ELECTRE II method to deal with probabilistic linguistic term sets and its application to edge computing. Nonlinear Dyn 96(3):2125–2143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Manupati VK, Ramkumar M, Samanta D (2018) A multi-criteria decision making approach for the urban renewal in Southern India. Sustain Cities Soc 42:471–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ou Yang YP, Shieh HM, Tzeng GH (2013) A VIKOR technique based on DEMATEL and ANP for formation security risk control assessment. Inf Sci 232:482–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ou Y, Li LZ, Zou B, Pei Z (2018) The linguistic intuitionistic fuzzy set TOPSIS method for linguistic multi-criteria decision makings. Int J Comput Intell Syst 11(1):120–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pang Q, Wang H, Xu ZS (2016) Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Inf Sci 369:128–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peng XD, Selvachandran G (2017) Pythagorean fuzzy set: state of the art and future directions. Artif Intell Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-017-9596-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Qin JD, Liu XW, 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):626–638MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ramkumar M, Jenamani M (2012) E-procurement service provider selection—an analytic network process—based group decision-making approach. Serv Sci 4(3):183–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ramkumar M, Jenamani M (2015) Sustainability in supply chain through e-procurement—an assessment framework based on DANP and liberatore. IEEE Syst J 9(4):1554–1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramkumar M, Schoenherr T, Jenamani M (2016) Risk assessment of outsourcing e-procurement services: integrating SWOT analysis with a modified ANP-based fuzzy inference systems. Prod Plan Control 27(14):1171–1190Google Scholar
  31. Rodriguez RM, Martinez L, Herrera F (2012) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(1):109–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roy B (1968) Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). La Revue d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO) 2(8):57–75Google Scholar
  33. Sang X, Liu X, Qin J (2015) An analytical solution to fuzzy TOPSIS and its application in personnel selection for knowledge-intensive enterprise. Appl Soft Comput J 30:190–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun BZ, Ma WM (2014) Soft fuzzy rough sets and its application in decision making. Artif Intell Rev 41(1):67–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tan QY, Wei CP, Liu Q, Feng XQ (2016) The hesitant fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS method based on novel information measures. Asia-Pac J Oper Res 33(5):1650035MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tang J, Meng F (2017) Decision making with multiplicative hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Neural Comput Appl.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-3227-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(6):529–539zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Tosun O, Akyuz G (2015) A fuzzy TODIM approach for the supplier selection problem. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(2):317–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Turksen IB (2002) Type 2 representation and reasoning for CWW. Fuzzy Sets Syst 127(1):17–36MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5(4):297–323zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Uygun O, Kacamak H, Kahraman UA (2014) An integrated DEMATEL and fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company. Comput Ind Eng 86:137–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang J, Wang JQ, Zhang HY (2016a) A likelihood-based TODIM approach based on multi-hesitant fuzzy linguistic information for evaluation in logistics outsourcing. Comput Ind Eng 99:287–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang JQ, Wu JT, Wang J, Zhang HY, Chen XH (2016b) Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on the Hausdorff distance of hesitant fuzzy linguistic numbers. Soft Comput 20(4):1621–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wei CP, Ren ZL, Rodriguez RM (2015) A hesitant fuzzy linguistic TODIM method based on a score function. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(4):701–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Xia MM, Xu ZS (2017) Some studies on properties of hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Mach Learn Cybernet 8(2):489–495MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Xu ZS (2012) Linguistic decision making: theory and methods. Springer, BerlinzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xu ZS, Da QL (2002) The uncertain OWA operator. Int J Intell Syst 17(6):569–575zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xu ZS, Wang H (2016) On the syntax and semantics of virtual linguistic terms for information fusion in decision making. Inf Fus 34:43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-II. Inf Sci 8(4):301–357MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang XL, Xu ZS (2014) The TODIM analysis approach based on novel measured functions under hesitant fuzzy environment. Knowl-Based Syst 61:48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Digital Fujian Internet-of-Things Laboratory of Environmental MonitoringFujian Normal UniversityFuzhouChina
  2. 2.College of Mathematics and InformaticsFujian Normal UniversityFuzhouChina
  3. 3.Business SchoolSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  4. 4.School of Computer and SoftwareNanjing University of Information Science and TechnologyNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations