Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 2015–2024 | Cite as

Technical attributes ratings in fuzzy QFD by integrating interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and Choquet integral

Methodologies and Application


As a customer-oriented methodology, fuzzy quality function deployment (QFD) has been widely applied to translate customer requirements into product design requirements and to improve the product quality in fuzzy environments. This paper puts forward an approach, which rates technical attributes in fuzzy QFD by integrating interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and Choquet integral under the case of considering the correlation among customer requirements. A method for converting interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers into relative weights for customer requirements is proposed. In order to reflect different attitudes toward risks from different decision makers, a score function with a degree of risk preference K and interval comparison matrices are obtained. Finally, the proposed approach is illustrated with a scenario about the process of designing steering wheel for electric vehicles.


Technical attributes ratings Fuzzy QFD Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets Choquet integral 



This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71272177).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

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

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Akao Y (1990) Quality function deployment: intergrating customer requirements into product design (Translated by G Mazur). Productivity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Atanassov KT, Gargov G (1989) Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Set Syst 31:343–349MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bottani E, Rizzi A (2006) Strategic management of logistics service: a fuzzy QFD approach. Int J Prod Econ 103(2):585–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen YZ, Fung RYK, Tang J (2006) Rating technical attributes in fuzzy QFD by integrating fuzzy weighted average method and fuzzy expected value operator. Eur J Oper Res 174(3):1553–1566CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen N, Xu Z, Xia M (2013) Interval-valued hesitant preference relations and their applications to group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 37:528–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dimitrova Z, Maréchal F (2016) Techno-economic design of hybrid electric vehicles and possibilities of the multi-objective optimization structure. Appl Energy 161:746–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dursun M, Karsak EE (2013) A QFD-based fuzzy MCDM approach for supplier selection. Appl Math Model 37(8):5864–5875MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Francisco Rodrigues LJ, Carpinetti LCR (2016) Amulticriteria approach based on fuzzy QFD for choosing criteria for supplier selection. Comput Ind Eng 101:269–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grabisch M (1997) K-order additive discrete fuzzy measures and their representation. Fuzzy Set Syst 92(2):167–189MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Hammer PL, Holzman R (1992) Approximations of pseudo-Boolean functions; applications to game theory. Math Methods Oper Res 36(36):3–21MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Hauser JR, Clausing D (1987) The house of quality. Harvard Bus Rev 66(3):63–73Google Scholar
  12. Jeang A, Chung CP, Chen CW et al (2009) Optimizing process parameters of hot-bar soldering process through quality function deployment and Taguchi method. J Mater Process Technol 209(6):2967–2977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jia GZ, Bai M (2011) An approach for manufacturing strategy development based on fuzzy-QFD. Comput Ind Eng 60(3):445–454MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Joshi D, Kumar S (2016) Interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy Choquet integral based TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision making. Eur J Oper Res 248(1):183–191MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Karsak EE, Dursun M (2015) An integrated fuzzy MCDM approach for supplier evaluation and selection. Comput Ind Eng 82:82–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Khoo LP, Ho NC (1996) Framework of a fuzzy quality function deployment system. Int J Prod Res 34(2):299–311CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Labreuche C, Grabisch M (2003) The Choquet integral for the aggregation of interval scales in multicriteria decision making. Fuzzy Set Syst 137(1):11–26MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee Amy HI, Kang HY, Yang CY, Lin CY (2010) An evaluation framework for product planning using FANP, QFD and multi-choice goal programming. Int J Prod Res 48(13):3977–3997CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee CKM, Ru CTY, Yeung CL et al (2015) Analyze the healthcare service requirement using fuzzy QFD. Comput Ind 74:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li DF (2014) Multiattribute decision-making methods with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. In: Li DF (ed) Decision and game theory in management with intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, vol 308. Springer, Berlin, pp 153–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu Y, Zhou J, Chen Y (2014) Using fuzzy non-linear regression to identify the degree of compensation among customer requirements in QFD. Neurocomputing 142:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marichal JL (2000) An axiomatic approach of the discrete Choquet integral as a tool to aggregate interacting criteria. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 8(6):800–807MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Murofushi T, Sugeno M (1989) An interpretation of fuzzy measures and the Choquet integral as an integral with respect to a fuzzy measure. Fuzzy Set Syst 29(2):201–227MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Murofushi T, Sugeno M (1993) Some quantities represented by the Choquet integral. Fuzzy Set Syst 56(2):229–235MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Nakahara Y, Sasaki M, Gen M (1992) On the linear programming problems with interval coefficients. Comput Ind Eng 23(1):301–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sener Z, Karsak EE (2010) A decision model for setting target levels in quality function deployment using nonlinear programming-based fuzzy regression and optimization. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 48(9–12):1173–1184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sugeno M (1974) Theory of fuzzy integrals and its application. Ph.D. thesis, Tokyo Institute of Technology, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  28. Tang J, Fung RYK, Xu B et al (2002) A new approach to quality function deployment planning with financial consideration. Comput Oper Res 29(11):1447–1463CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Vairaktarakis GL (1999) Optimiz ation tools for design and marketing of new/improved products using the house of quality. J Oper Manag 17(6):645–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vanegas LV, Labib AW (2001) A fuzzy quality function deployment (FQFD) model for deriving optimum targets. Int J Prod Res 39(1):99–120CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang CH (2016) Incorporating the concept of systematic innovation into quality function deployment for developing multi-functional smart phones. Comput Ind Eng. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2016.07.005
  32. Wang YM, Chin KS (2011) Technical importance ratings in fuzzy QFD by integrating fuzzy normalization and fuzzy weighted average. Comput Math Appl 62(11):4207–4221MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang YM, Yang JB, Xu DL (2005) Interval weight generation approaches based on consistency test and interval comparison matrices. Appl Math Comput 167(1):252–273MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Wei CP, Xia MM, Zhang YZ (2009) Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Control Decis 24(8):1230–1234MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. Xu ZS, Da QL (2003) Possibility degree method for ranking interval numbers and its application. J Syst Eng 18(1):67–70Google Scholar
  36. Xu ZS, Xia MM (2011) Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 181(11):2128–2138MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. Zaim S, Sevkli M, Camgöz-Akdağ H et al (2014) Use of ANP weighted crisp and fuzzy QFD for product development. Expert Syst Appl 41(9):4464–4474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zhang Z (2013) Interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators and their application in group decision-making. J Appl Math 2013(2):348–377Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementShanghai UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations