Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 8, pp 2633–2640 | Cite as

A new hybrid intuitionistic approach for new product selection

  • Kumru Didem AtalayEmail author
  • Gülin Feryal Can
Methodologies and Application


This paper proposes a new hybrid approach for multi-criteria decision-making problems combining intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and intuitionistic fuzzy multi-objective optimization by ratio analysis. Analytic hierarchy process has an inherent ability for handling intangible problems and implements a simple scale to represent evaluations in the structure of pairwise comparisons. Multi-objective optimization by ratio analysis optimizes the solution of a problem having two or more conflicting objectives, taking into account certain constraints. In real-life decision problems, evaluations of decision makers related to performance of alternatives and criteria weights can be expressed by linguistic terms comprising vagueness and uncertainty. These uncertain, vague and hesitant judgments of decision makers can be described more comprehensively by using intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. The proposed approach is a powerful tool for dealing with information which consists of hesitancy and vagueness. An illustrative example related to new product selection for a company is also presented to demonstrate the implementation of the approach.


Intuitionistic fuzzy sets IFAHP IFMOORA New product selection 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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


  1. Abdullah L, Jaafar S, Taib I (2009) A new analytic hierarchy process in multi-attribute group decision making. Int J Soft Comput 4(5):208–214Google Scholar
  2. Abdullah L, Najib L (2014) A new preference scale of intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process in multi-criteria decision making problems. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(2):1039–1049MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Akkaya G, Turanoğlu B, Öztaş S (2015) An integrated fuzzy AHP and fuzzy MOORA approach to the problem of industrial engineering sector choosing. Expert Syst Appl 42(24):9565–9573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Atanassov KT (1999) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. In: Kacprzyk J (ed) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp 1–137Google Scholar
  6. Dutta B, Guha D (2015) Preference programming approach for solving intuitionistic fuzzy AHP. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(5):977–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Khaleie S, Fasanghari M (2012) An intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making method using entropy and association coefficient. Soft Comput 16(7):1197–1211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Liao H, Xu Z (2014) Priorities of intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation based on multiplicative consistency. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22(6):1669–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Liao H, Xu Z (2015) Consistency of the fused intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation in group intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Appl Soft Comput 35:812–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mandal UK, Sarkar B (2012) Selection of best intelligent manufacturing system (IMS) under fuzzy moora conflicting mcdm environment. Int J Emerg Technol Adv Eng 2(9):301–310Google Scholar
  11. Pei Z (2015) Intuitionistic fuzzy variables: concepts and applications in decision making. Expert Syst Appl 42(22):9033–9045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peng J, Mok HM, Tse WM (2005) Fuzzy dominance based on credibility distributions. In: International conference on fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery. Springer, Berlin, pp 295–303Google Scholar
  13. Pérez-Domínguez L, Alvarado-Iniesta A, Rodríguez-Borbón I et al (2015) Intuitionistic fuzzy MOORA for supplier selection. Dyna 82(191):34–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Saaty T (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281Google Scholar
  15. Sadiq R, Tesfamariam S (2009) Environmental decision-making under uncertainty using intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (IF-AHP). Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23(1):75–91MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tan C, Jiang ZZ, Chen X et al (2015) Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy quasi-Choquet geometric operators and their applications to multicriteria decision making. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 14(2):139–172MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tavana M, Zareinejad M, Di Caprio D et al (2016) An integrated intuitionistic fuzzy AHP and SWOT method for outsourcing reverse logistics. Appl Soft Comput 40:544–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wang H, Qian G, Feng X (2011) An intuitionistic fuzzy AHP based on synthesis of eigenvectors and its application. Inf Technol J 10(10):1850–1866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Xu Z (2007) Intuitionistic preference relations and their application in group decision making. Inf Sci 177(11):2363–2379MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Xu ZS, Chen J (2008) An overview of distance and similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 16(04):529–555MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Xu Z, Liao H (2014) Intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22(4):749–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringBaskent UniversityEtimesgutTurkey

Personalised recommendations