Advertisement

Multiple-attribute decision making problems based on SVTNH methods

  • Chiranjibe JanaEmail author
  • G. Muhiuddin
  • Madhumangal Pal
Original Research
  • 48 Downloads

Abstract

The neutrosophic set (NS) is a leading tool in modeling of situations involving incomplete, indeterminate and inconsistent information. The single-valued neutrosophic sets (SVNs) is more useful tool than neutrosophic sets in some applications of engineering and scientific problems. In this paper, we study Hamacher operations and operations between single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic numbers. Then we propose the single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher weighted arithmetic averaging (SVTNHWA) operator, single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher ordered weighted arithmetic averaging (SVTNHOWA) operator, single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher hybrid weighted averaging (SVTNHHWA) operator, single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher weighted geometric averaging (SVTNHWGA) operator and single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher ordered weighted geometric averaging (SVTNHOWGA) operator and single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic Hamacher hybrid weighted geometric averaging (SVTNHHWGA) operator, and obtain some of their properties. Furthermore, we developed a multiple-attribute decision-making method in single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic (SVTN) environment based on these operators. Finally, we proposed an application of MADM problem in assessment of potential of software system commercialization.

Keywords

Single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic number Hamacher operation Arithmetic averaging operator Geometric averaging operator MADM method 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and helpful suggestions which greatly improved the quality of this paper. The second author was supported by the research grant S-0064-1439, Deanship of Scientific Research, University of Tabuk, Tabuk-71491, Saudi Arabia

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest between the authors and the institute where the work has been carried out.

Ethical approval

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

References

  1. Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Set Syst 20:87–96zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beliakov G, Pradera A, Calvo T (2007) Aggregation functions: a guide for practitioners. Springer, HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014a) Cosine similarity measure base multi-attribute decision making with trapesoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 8:46–56Google Scholar
  4. Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014b) A new methodology for neutrosophic multi-attribute decision-making with unknown weight information. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 3:42–50Google Scholar
  5. Broumi S, Smarandache F (2014) Single valued neutrosophic trapezoid linguistic aggregation operators based multi-attribute decision making. Bull Pure Appl Sci 33(2):135–155Google Scholar
  6. Deli I, Subaş Y (2014) Single valued neutrosophic numbers and their applications to multi-criteria decision making problem. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 2(1):1–3Google Scholar
  7. Deli I, Subaş Y (2015) Some weighted geometric operators with SVTrN-numbers and their application to multi-criteria decision making problems. J Intell Fuzzy Syst.  https://doi.org/10.3233/jifs-151677 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Deschrijver G, Kerre EE (2002) Ageneralization of operators on intuitionistic fuzzy sets using triangular norms and conorms. Notes on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets 8:19–27zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Deschrijver G, Cornelis C, Kerre EE (2004) On the representation of intuitionistic fuzzy \(t\)-norms and \(t\)-conorms. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 12:45–61zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fan C, Ye J, Hu K, Fan E (2017) Bonferroni mean operators of linguistic neutrosophic numbers and their multiple attribute group decision-making methods. Information 8:107.  https://doi.org/10.3390/info8030107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gao H, Wei GW, Huang YH (2018) Dual hesitant bipolar fuzzy Hamacher prioritized aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. IEEE Access 6(1):11508–11522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garg H, Kumar K (2018) A novel exponential distance and its based TOPSIS method for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets using connection number of SPA theory. Artif Intell Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9668-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gupta A, Kohli S (2016) An MCDM approach towards handling outliers in web data: a case study using OWA operators. Artif Intell Rev 46(1):59–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hamachar H (1978) Uber logische verknunpfungenn unssharfer Aussagen undderen Zugenhorige Bewertungsfunktione. In: Trappl R, Klir GJ, Riccardi L (eds) Progress in cybernetics and systems research, vol 3. Hemisphere, Washington DC, pp 276–288Google Scholar
  15. He YD, Chen HY, Zhou LG (2013) Generalized interval-valued Atanassovs intuitionistic fuzzy power operators and their application to group decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 15(4):401–411MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Hu BQ, Wong H (2013) Generalized interval-valued fuzzy rough sets based on interval- valued fuzzy logical operators. Int J Fuzzy Syst 15(4):381–391MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. Jana C, Pal M (2019a) Assessment of enterprise performance based on picture fuzzy Hamacher aggregation operators. Symmetry 11(1):75.  https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11010075 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Jana C, Pal M (2019b) A robust single-valued neutrosophic soft aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making. Symmetry 11(1):110.  https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11010110 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jana C, Pal M, Wang JQ (2018) Bipolar fuzzy Dombi aggregation operators and its application in multiple attribute decision making process. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-018-1076-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jana C, Senapati T, Pal M, Yager RR (2019a) Picture fuzzy Dombi aggregation operators: application to MADM process. Appl Soft Comput 74(1):99–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.10.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jana C, Pal M, Wang JQ (2019b) Bipolar fuzzy Dombi prioritized aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. J Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04130-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jana C, Senapati T, Pal M (2019c) Pythagorean fuzzy Dombi aggregation operators and its applications in multiple attribute decision-making. Int J Intell Syst.  https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ji P, Zhang HY, Wang JQ (2018a) A projection-based outranking method with multi-hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for hotel location selection. Cogn Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-018-9552-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ji P, Wang JQ, Zhang HY (2018a) Frank prioritized Bonferroni mean operator with single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application in selecting third-party logistics providers. Neural Comput Appl 30(3):799–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Levy R, Brodsky A, Luo J (2016) Decision guidance framework to support operations and analysis of a hybrid renewable energy system. J Manag Anal 3(4):285–304.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2016.1229140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li J, Wang JQ (2017) Multi-criteria outranking methods with hesitant probabilistic fuzzy sets. Cogn Comput 9:611–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liang RX, Wang JQ, Zhang HY (2017) A multi-criteria decision-making method based on single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic preference relations with complete weight information. Neural Comput Appl.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-2925-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu P (2013) Some generalized dependent aggregation operators with intuitionistic linguistic numbers and their application to group decision making. J Comput Syst Sci 79(1):131–143MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu P (2016) The aggregation operators based on Archimedean t-conorm and t-norm for single-valued neutrosophic numbers and their application to decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 18(5):849–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu P, Liu Y (2014) An approach to multiple attribute group decision making based on intuitionistic trapezoidal fuzzy power generalized aggregation operator. Int J Comput Intell Syst 7(2):291–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu P, Wang Y (2014a) Multiple attribute decision-making method based on single-valued neutrosophic normalized weighted Bonferroni mean. Neural Comput Appl 25:2001–2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Liu P, Wang YM (2014b) Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators. Appl Soft Comput 17(1):90–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Liu P, Yu XC (2014) 2-dimension uncertain linguistic power generalized weighted aggregation operator and its application for multiple attribute group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 57(1):69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Liu P, Liu Z, Zhang X (2014a) Some intuitionistic uncertain linguistic Heronian mean operators and their application to group decision making. Appl Math Comput 230:570–586MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Liu P, Li Y, Chen Y (2014b) Some generalized neutrosophic number Hamacher aggregation operators ad their application to group decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 16(2):212–255MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. Liu P, Zhang L, Liu X, Wang P (2016) Multi-valued neutrosophic number Bonferroni mean operators with their applications in multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 15:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lu Z, Ye J (2017) Single-valued neutrosophic hybrid arithmetic and geometric aggregation operators and their decision-making method. Information.  https://doi.org/10.3390/info8030084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lu J, Tang X, Wei GW, Wei C, Wei Y (2019) Bidirectional project method for dual hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making and their application to performance assessment of new rural construction. Int J Intell Syst 34(8):1920–1934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nancy GH (2016) Novel single-valued neutrosophic aggregated operators under frank norm operation and its application to decision-making process. Int J Uncertain Quantif 6(4):361–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peng J, Wang JQ, Chen H (2016) Simplified neutrosophic sets and their applications in multi-citeria group decision making problems. Int J Syst Sci 47(10):2342–2358zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roychowdhury S, Wang BH (1998) On generalized Hamacher families of triangular operators. Int J Approx Reason 19:419–439MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smarandache F (1999) A unifying field in logics. Neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, RehobothzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Smarandache F (2005) Neutrosophic set—a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set. Int J Pure Appl Math 24(3):287–297MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Tan R, Zhang W, Chen S (2017) Some generalized single valued neutrosophic linguistic operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. J Syst Sci Inf 5(2):148–162Google Scholar
  45. Tang X, Wei GW (2019) Multiple attribute decision-making with dual hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy information. Cogn Comput 11(2):193–211MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teixeira C, Lopes I, Figueiredo M (2018) Classification methodology for spare parts management combining maintenance and logistics perspectives. J Manag Anal 5(2):116–135.  https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2018.1436989 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thamaraiselvi A, Santhi R (2016) A new approach for optimization of real life transportation problem in neutrosophic environment. Math Probl Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5950747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang WZ, Liu XW (2011) Intuitionistic fuzzy geometric aggregation operators based on Einstein operations. Int J Intell Syst 26(11):1049–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wang JQ, Zhang Z (2009) Aggregation operators on intuitionistic trapezoidal fuzzy number and its application to multi-criteria decision making problems. Syst Eng Electron 20(2):321–326Google Scholar
  50. Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 4:410–413zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. Wei GW, Alsaadi FE, Tasawar H, Alsaedi A (2018) Bipolar fuzzy Hamacher aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 20(1):1–12MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wu Q, Wu P, Zhou L, Chen H, Guan X (2018) Some new Hamacher aggregation operators under single-valued neutrosophic 2-tuple linguistic environment and their applications to multiattribute group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 116:144–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wu L, Wang J, Gao H (2019) Models for competiveness evaluation of tourist destination with some interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy Hamy mean operators. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 36(6):5693–5709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Xia MM, Xu ZS, Zhu B (2012) Some issues on intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators based on Archimedean t-conorm and t-norm. Knowl Based Syst 31(1):78–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Xu DL (1987) Toward escape from the limitations of economic systems analysis: introduction of dimensionality. Syst Res 4(4):243–250.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.3850040404 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Xu DL (1988) A fuzzy multiobjective programming algorithm in decision support systems. Ann Oper Res 12(1):315–320MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xu ZS (2007) Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 15(6):1179–1187Google Scholar
  58. Xu ZS, Yager RR (2006) Some geometric aggregation operators based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Gen Syst 35(4):417–433MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yager R (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18(1):183–190zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ye J (2013) Multicriteria decision-making method using the correlation coefficient under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Int J Gen Syst 42(4):386–394MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ye J (2014a) Prioritized aggregation operators of trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their application to multicriteria decision making. Neural Comput Appl 25(6):1447–1454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Ye J (2014b) Similarity measures between interval neutrosophic sets and their applications in multicriteria decision-making. J Int Fuzzy Syst 26:165–172zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. Ye J (2014c) A multicriteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:2459–2466MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. Ye JJ (2014d) Some aggregation operators of interval neutrosophic linguistic numbers for multiple attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27:2231–2241MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. Ye J (2015) Trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic set and its application to multiple attribute decision making. Neural Comput Appl 26(5):1157–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ye J (2016) Aggregation operators of neutrosophic linguistic numbers for multiple attribute group decision making. SpringerPlus 5:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ye J (2017) Some weighted aggregation operators of trapezoidal neutrosophic numbers and their multiple attribute decision making method. Informatica 28(2):387–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Yu DJ (2012) Group decision making based on generalized intuitionistic fuzzy prioritized geometric operator. Int J Intell Syst 27(7):635–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yu DJ (2013a) Multi-criteria decision making based on generalized prioritized aggregation operators under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Int J Fuzzy Syst 15(1):47–54MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Yu DJ (2013b) Intuitionistic fuzzy Choquet aggregation operator based on Einstein operation laws. Sci Iran (Trans Ind Eng) 20(6):2109–2122Google Scholar
  71. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Zhang Z (2017) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy Frank aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute group decision making. Neural Comput Appl 28(6):1471–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zhang HY, Wang JQ, Chen XH (2014) Interval neutrosophic sets and their application in multicriteria decision making problems. Sci World J, Article ID 645953, p 15Google Scholar
  74. Zhang HY, Ji P, Wang JQ, Chen XH (2016) A neutrosophic normal cloud and its application in decision-making. Cogn Comput 8(4):649–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zhang C, Wang C, Zhang Z, Tian D (2019) A novel technique for multiple attribute group decision making in interval-valued hesitant fuzzy environments with incomplete weight information. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 10(6):2417–2437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zhao XF, Wei GW (2013) Some intuitionistic fuzzy Einstein hybrid aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. Knowl Based Syst 37:472–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zhao H, Xu ZS, Ni MF, Liu SS (2010) Generalized aggregation operators for intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(1):1–30zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Mathematics with Oceanology and Computer ProgrammingVidyasagar UniversityMidnaporeIndia
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of TabukTabukSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations