International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 1261–1278 | Cite as

A Dynamic Reference Point Method for Emergency Response Under Hesitant Probabilistic Fuzzy Environment

  • Jie Gao
  • Zeshui XuEmail author
  • Huchang Liao


According to the characteristics of emergency decision-making in crisis management, this paper proposes a dynamic decision-making method using the hesitant probabilistic fuzzy set to deal with the inadequate information, uncertainty and dynamic trends. This method is suitable for emergency decision-making as it provides supports for the dynamic and evolutionary characteristics of emergency responses and the uncertain probability about external environment is also considered. In order to make a continuous adjustment with the development of situations, we give a definition of the expectation level, based on which the dynamic reference point method is proposed to obtain the optimal emergency response plan under the hesitant probabilistic fuzzy environment. We also analyze the probability of different situations that may occur in the process of emergency decision-making and provide an algorithm for solving this problem. Finally, a practical case of hazardous goods leakage pollution accident is given to illustrate our method, and then, the optimal decision alternative chain is obtained.


Emergency decision-making Hesitant probabilistic fuzzy variable (HPFV) Hesitant probabilistic fuzzy number (HPFN) Expectation level Dynamic reference point (DRP) method 



The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions, which have led to an improved version of this paper. The work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71571123, 71501135, 71532007), the Scientific Research Found of Sichuan Provincial Education Department (Nos. 16ZB0343, DSWL16-12) and the Young scholars high level academic team construction project at Sichuan University (skgt201501).


  1. 1.
    Yang, L., Fan, Z.P., Zhang, Y.: Risk decision analysis in emergency response: a method based on cumulative prospect theory. Comput. Oper. Res. 42, 75–82 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yang, L., Fan, Z.P., Yuan, Y., Li, H.Y.: A FTA-based method for risk decision-making in emergency response. Comput. Oper. Res. 42, 49–57 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hämäläinen, R.P., Lindstedt, M.R., Sinkko, K.: Multiattribute risk analysis in nuclear emergency management. Risk Anal. 20(4), 455–468 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shim, K.C., Fontane, D.G., Labadie, J.W.: Spatial decision support system for integrated river basin flood control. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 128(3), 190–201 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Levy, J.K., Taji, K.: Group decision support for hazards planning and emergency management: a Group Analytic Network Process (GANP) approach. Math. Comput. Model. 46(7), 906–917 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fu, G.: A fuzzy optimization method for multicriteria decision making: an application to reservoir flood control operation. Expert Syst. Appl. 34(1), 145–149 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, G.Q., Ma, J., Lu, J.: Emergency management evaluation by a fuzzy multi-criteria group decision support system. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 23(4), 517–527 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhou, Q., Huang, W.L., Zhang, Y.: Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Saf. Sci. 49(2), 243–252 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yan, F., Chen, L.S., Zhang, F., Zhao, Y.F.: Application of improved FAHP for nuclear reactor accident emergency decision. Appl. Mech. Mater. 389, 136–142 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang, Q.S., Xie, B.L., Zhang, X.M.: Uncertain internet public opinion emergency decision system based on case reasoning and grey relational analysis. Open Cybern. Syst. J. 8, 274–282 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sun, B.Z., Ma, W.M., Chen, X.T.: Fuzzy rough set on probabilistic approximation space over two universes and its application to emergency decision making. Expert Syst. 32(4), 507–521 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Qu, J.H., Meng, X.L., You, H.: Multi-stage ranking of emergency technology alternatives for water source pollution accidents using a fuzzy group decision making tool. J. Hazard. Mater. 310, 68–81 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhao, J.D., Jin, T., Shen, H.Z.: A case-based evolutionary group decision support method for emergency response. In: Intelligence and Security Informatics, pp. 94–104. (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pauwels, N., Van De Walle, B., Hardeman, F., Soudan, K.: The implications of irreversibility in emergency response decisions. Theory Decis. 49(1), 25–51 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang, J.J., Xu, C.H.: Emergency decision engineering model based on sequential games. Syst. Eng. Proced. 5, 276–282 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ge, L., Mourits, M.C., Kristensen, A.R., Huirne, R.B.: A modelling approach to support dynamic decision-making in the control of FMD epidemics. Prev. Vet. Med. 95(3), 167–174 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Georgiadou, P.S., Papazoglou, I.A., Kiranoudis, C.T., Markatos, N.C.: Modeling emergency evacuation for major hazard industrial sites. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92(10), 1388–1402 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8(3), 338–353 (1965)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Bridging gaps between several forms of granular computing. Granul. Comput. 1(2), 115–126 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pérez, I.J., Cabrerizo, F.J., Herrera-Viedma, E.: A mobile decision support system for dynamic group decision making problems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 40(6), 1244–1256 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yao, Y.: A triarchic theory of granular computing. Granul. Comput. 1(2), 145–157 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pedrycz, W., Rocha, A.F.: Fuzzy-set based models of neurons and knowledge-based networks. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 1(4), 254–266 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cai, M., Li, Q., Lang, G.: Shadowed sets of dynamic fuzzy sets. Granul. Comput. 1–10 (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilke, G., Portmann, E.: Granular computing as a basis of human–data interaction: a cognitive cities use case. Granul. Comput. 1(3), 181–197 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhou, X.: Membership grade mining of mutually inverse fuzzy implication propositions. Granul. Comput. 2(1), 55–62 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Syau, Y.R., Skowron, A., Lin, E.B.: Inclusion degree with variable-precision model in analyzing inconsistent decision tables. Granul. Comput. 1–8 (2016)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wang, C., Fu, X., Meng, S., He, Y.: SPIFGIA operators and their applications to decision making. Granul. Comput. 1–10 (2016)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sanchez, M.A., Castro, J.R., Castillo, O., Mendoza1, O., Rodriguez-Diaz, A., Melin, P.: Fuzzy higher type information granules from an uncertainty measurement. Granul. Comput. 1–9 (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Turksen, I.B.: Interval valued fuzzy sets based on normal forms. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20(2), 191–210 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Xu, Z.S., Gou, X.J.: An overview of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy information aggregations and applications. Granul. Comput. 2, 1–27 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Fuzzy Sets and Systems: Theory and Applications, pp. 1–12. Academic Press, New York (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mendel, J.M.: A comparison of three approaches for estimating (synthesizing) an interval type-2 fuzzy set model of a linguistic term for computing with words. Granul. Comput. 1(1), 59–69 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Atanassov, K.T.: Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20, 87–96 (1986)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Das, S., Kar, S., Pal, T.: Robust decision making using intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. Granul. Comput. 2(1), 41–54 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Torra, V.: Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(6), 529–539 (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zhang, Z.M., Wang, C., Tian, D.Z., Li, K.: Induced generalized hesitant fuzzy operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Comput. Ind. Eng. 67, 116–138 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhang, Z.M.: Hesitant fuzzy power aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Inf. Sci. 234, 150–181 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liao, H.C., Xu, Z.S., Zeng, X.J.: Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making. Inf. Sci. 271, 125–142 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Xu, Z.S., Wang, H.: Managing multi-granularity linguistic information in qualitative group decision making: an overview. Granul. Comput. 1(1), 21–35 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Busemeyer, J.R., Pleskac, T.J.: Theoretical tools for understanding and aiding dynamic decision making. J. Math. Psychol. 53(3), 126–138 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Saaty, T.L.: Time dependent decision-making; dynamic priorities in the AHP/ANP: generalizing from points to functions and from real to complex variables. Math. Comput. Model. 46(7), 860–891 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Li, L., Lai, K.K.: Fuzzy dynamic programming approach to hybrid multiobjective multistage decision-making problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 117(1), 13–25 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Chen, S.Y., Fu, G.T.: Combining fuzzy iteration model with dynamic programming to solve multiobjective multistage decision making problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 152(3), 499–512 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nielsen, T.D., Jaffray, J.Y.: Dynamic decision making without expected utility: an operational approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169(1), 226–246 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bulinskaya, E.V.: Some aspects of decision making under uncertainty. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 137(8), 2613–2632 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Xu, Z.S., Yager, R.R.: Dynamic intuitionistic fuzzy multi-attribute decision making. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 48(1), 246–262 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Xu, Z.S., Zhou, W.: Consensus building with a group of decision makers under the hesitant probabilistic fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 1–23 (2016)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xu, Z.S., Xia, M.M.: Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf. Sci. 181(11), 2128–2138 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Diamond, P., Kloeden, P.E.: Metric Spaces of Fuzzy Sets: Theory and Applications. World Scientific, Singapore (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kacprzyk, J.: Multistage Fuzzy Control: A Prescriptive Approach. Wiley, New York (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhu, B., Xu, Z.S.: Consistency measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 22(1), 35–45 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chen, S.J., Hwang, C.L.: Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Springer, Berlin (1992)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cheng, T.J., Wu, F.P., Li, J.B.: Risk decision model for emergency response based on cumulative prospective theory with incomplete information. Syst. Eng. 04, 70–75 (2014). (in Chinese) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Disaster Management and ReconstructionSichuan University-The Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityChengduChina
  2. 2.Department of Business AdministrationSichuan Tourism CollegeChengduChina
  3. 3.Business SchoolSichuan UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations