Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method in Fuzzy Environment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Fuzzy Decision Analysis: Multi Attribute Decision Making Approach

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 1121))

Abstract

This chapter explores the expansion of the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) method in interval and fuzzy environments. The SAW method, a popular decision-making approach, is enhanced by incorporating interval arithmetic and fuzzy logic. Real-world examples illustrate the practical implications of the expanded SAW method, demonstrating its versatility in diverse domains. The abstract highlights the benefits and challenges of the interval and fuzzy SAW method and emphasizes its potential as a valuable tool for informed decision-making in uncertain and imprecise contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Afshari, A. R., Yusuff, R., & Derayatifar, A. R. (2012, May). Project manager selection by using Fuzzy Simple Additive Weighting method. In 2012 International Conference on Innovation Management and Technology Research (pp. 412–416). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allahviranloo, T., Lotfi, F. H., Kiasary, M. K., Kiani, N. A., & Alizadeh, L. (2008). Solving fully fuzzy linear programming problem by the ranking function. Applied mathematical sciences, 2(1), 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Büyüközkan, G., & Güler, M. (2020). Smart watch evaluation with integrated hesitant fuzzy linguistic SAW-ARAS technique. Measurement, 153, 107353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Büyüközkan, G., Karabulut, Y., & Güler, M. (2018). Strategic renewable energy source selection for turkey with hesitant fuzzy MCDM method. In: Energy management collective and computational intelligence with theory and applications, 229–250.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chen, T. Y. (2012). Comparative analysis of SAW and TOPSIS based on interval-valued fuzzy sets: Discussions on score functions and weight constraints. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(2), 1848–1861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen, L. C., & Utama, D. N. (2022). Decision support model for determining the best employee using fuzzy logic and simple additive weighting. Journal of Computer Science, 18(6), 530–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chou, S. Y., Chang, Y. H., & Shen, C. Y. (2008). A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes. European Journal of Operational Research, 189(1), 132–145.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Gandhi, N. S., Thanki, S. J., & Thakkar, J. J. (2018). Ranking of drivers for integrated lean-green manufacturing for Indian manufacturing SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 171, 675–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Harsanyi, J. C. (1955). Cardinal welfare, individualistic ethics, and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 63(4), 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hwang, C. L., Yoon, K., Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, 58–191.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jahanshahloo, G. R., Lotfi, F. H., & Izadikhah, M. (2006). An algorithmic method to extend TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175(2), 1375–1384.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Jahanshahloo, G. R., Lotfi, F. H., Balf, F. R., & Rezai, H. Z. (2008). Using Monte Carlo method for ranking interval data. Applied mathematics and computation, 201(1–2), 613–620.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Kanuganti, S., Agarwala, R., Dutta, B., Bhanegaonkar, P. N., Singh, A. P., & Sarkar, A. K. (2017). Road safety analysis using multi-criteria approach: A case study in India. Transportation Research Procedia, 25, 4649–4661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lotfi, F. H., Allahviranloo, T., Jondabeh, M. A., & Alizadeh, L. (2009). Solving a full fuzzy linear programming using lexicography method and fuzzy approximate solution. Applied mathematical modelling, 33(7), 3151–3156.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mohamadinejadrashti, H., Amirteimoori, A., Kordrostami, S., & Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. (2021). Resource allocation and target setting based on DEA with managerial disposability: Evaluation and optimization the greenhouse gas emissions reduction in international airlines. Journal of Decisions and Operations Research, 6(3), 365–381.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Orojloo, M., Shahdany, S. M. H., & Roozbahani, A. (2018). Developing an integrated risk management framework for agricultural water conveyance and distribution systems within fuzzy decision making approaches. Science of the Total Environment, 627, 1363–1376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Roszkowska, E., & Kacprzak, D. (2016). The fuzzy SAW and fuzzy TOPSIS procedures based on ordered fuzzy numbers. Information Sciences, 369, 564–584.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Salehi, A., & Izadikhah, M. (2014). A novel method to extend SAW for decision-making problems with interval data. Decision Science Letters, 3(2), 225–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Seyedmohammadi, J., Jafarzadeh, A. A., Sarmadian, F., Shahbazi, F., & Ghorbani, M. A. (2017). Application of SAW, TOPSIS and fuzzy TOPSIS models in cultivation priority planning for maize, oilseed rape, and soybean crops. Geoderma.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wang, Y. J. (2015). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model based on simple additive weighting method and relative preference relation. Applied Soft Computing, 30, 412–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wang, Y. M., Greatbanks, R., & Yang, J. B. (2005). Interval efficiency assessment using data envelopment analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 153(3), 347–370.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Zamri, N., & Abdullah, L. (2015). A linear assignment method of simple additive weighting system in linear programming approach under interval type-2 fuzzy set concepts for MCDM problem. In: Advanced Computer and Communication Engineering Technology: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Communication and Computer Engineering (pp. 833–842). Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zolfani, S. H., Sedaghat, M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2012). Performance evaluating of rural ICT centers (telecenters), applying fuzzy AHP, SAW-G and TOPSIS Grey, a case study in Iran. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 18(2), 364–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Żak, J., Gołda, P., Cur, K., & Zawisza, T. (2021). Assessment of airside aerodrome infrastructure by SAW method with weights from Shannon's interval entropy. Archives of Transport 60(4).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

A special thanks to the Iranian DEA society for their unwavering spiritual support and consensus in the writing of this book. Your invaluable support has been truly remarkable, and we are deeply grateful for the opportunity to collaborate with such esteemed professionals.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    Farhad Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, Hamid Sharafi & Somayeh Razipour GhalehJough

  2. Faculty of Engineering & Natural Sciences, Istinye University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Tofigh Allahviranloo

  3. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Witold Pedrycz

  4. Department of Industrial Management, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammadreza Shahriari

Authors
  1. Farhad Hosseinzadeh Lotfi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tofigh Allahviranloo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Witold Pedrycz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammadreza Shahriari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hamid Sharafi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Somayeh Razipour GhalehJough
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Farhad Hosseinzadeh Lotfi .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F., Allahviranloo, T., Pedrycz, W., Shahriari, M., Sharafi, H., Razipour GhalehJough, S. (2023). Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method in Fuzzy Environment. In: Fuzzy Decision Analysis: Multi Attribute Decision Making Approach. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 1121. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-44742-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation