Advertisement

A Multiple Criteria Group Decision Making Model with Entropy Weight in an Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment

  • Chia-Chang HungEmail author
  • Liang-Hsuan Chen
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 52)

Abstract

The theory of intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs) is well-suited to dealing with vagueness and hesitancy. In this study, we propose a new fuzzy TOPSIS group decision making model using entropy weight for dealing with multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) problems in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment. This model can measure the degrees of satisfaction and dissatisfaction of each alternative evaluated across a set of criteria. To obtain the weighted fuzzy decision matrix, we employ the concept of Shannon’s entropy to calculate the criteria weights. An investment example is used to illustrate the application of the proposed model.

Entropy Intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs) Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) TOPSIS 

References

  1. 1.
    Hwang, C.L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making–methods and applications: a state-of-the-art survey. New York: Springer.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple criteria decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yeh, C.-H. (2002). A problem-based selection of multi-attribute decision-making methods. International Transactions in Operational Research, 9, 169–181.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8(3), 338–356.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gau, W.L., & Buehrer, D.J. (1993). Vague sets. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics, 23(2), 610–614.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bustince, H., & Burillo, P. (1996). Vague sets are intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 79, 403–405.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atanassov, K. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20, 87–96.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De, S.K., Biswas, R., & Roy, A.R. (2000). Some operations on intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, 477–484.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shannon, C.E. (1948). The mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423; 623–656.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Luca, & Termini, S. (1972). A definition of a non-probabilistic entropy in the setting of fuzzy sets theory. Information and Control, 20, 301–312.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Szmidt, E., & Kacprzyk, J. (2001). Entropy of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 118, 467–477.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vlachos, I.K., & Sergiadis, G.D. (2007). Intuitionistic fuzzy information – Applications to pattern recognition. Pattern Recognition Letters, 28, 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xu, Z. (2007). Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 15, 1179-1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Szmidt, E., & Kacprzyk, J. (2000). Distances between intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, 505–518.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu, Z. (2008). On multi-period multi-attribute decision making. Knowledge-Based Systems, 21, 164–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Information ManagementNational Cheng Kung UniversityTainanROC

Personalised recommendations