Multiple criteria decision making with hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets based on hesitance degree and least common multiple principle

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 4159-4172
Author(s):  
Donghai Liu ◽  
Dan Peng ◽  
Zaiming Liu
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Sarwar Sindhu ◽  
Tabasam Rashid ◽  
Agha Kashif ◽  
Juan Luis García Guirao

Probabilistic interval-valued hesitant fuzzy sets (PIVHFSs) are an extension of interval-valued hesitant fuzzy sets (IVHFSs) in which each hesitant interval value is considered along with its occurrence probability. These assigned probabilities give more details about the level of agreeness or disagreeness. PIVHFSs describe the belonging degrees in the form of interval along with probabilities and thereby provide more information and can help the decision makers (DMs) to obtain precise, rational, and consistent decision consequences than IVHFSs, as the correspondence of unpredictability and inaccuracy broadly presents in real life problems due to which experts are confused to assign the weights to the criteria. In order to cope with this problem, we construct the linear programming (LP) methodology to find the exact values of the weights for the criteria. Furthermore these weights are employed in the aggregation operators of PIVHFSs recently developed. Finally, the LP methodology and the actions are then applied on a certain multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) problem and a comparative analysis is given at the end.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 192-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhagawati Prasad Joshi

Due to the huge applications of fuzzy set theory, many generalizations were available in literature. Atanassov (1983) and Atanassov and Gargov (1989) introduced the notions of intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs) and interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IVIFSs) respectively. It is observed that IFSs and IVIFSs are more suitable tools for dealing with imprecise information and very powerful in modeling real life problems. However, many researchers made efforts to rank IVIFSs due to its importance in fusion of information. In this paper, a new ranking method is introduced and studied for IVIFSs. The proposed method is compared and illustrated with other existing methods by numerical examples. Then, it is utilized to identify the best alternative in multiple criteria decision-making problems in which criterion values for alternatives are IVIFSs. On the basis of the developed approach, it would provide a powerful way to the decision-makers to make his or her decision under IVIFSs. The validity and applicability of the proposed method are illustrated with practical examples.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-391
Author(s):  
Guangyan Lu ◽  
Wenjun Chang

In multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) with interval-valued belief distributions (IVBDs), individual IVBDs on multiple criteria are combined explicitly or implicitly to generate the expected utilities of alternatives, which can be used to make decisions with the aid of decision rules. To analyze an MCDM problem with a large number of criteria and grades used to profile IVBDs, effective algorithms are required to find the solutions to the optimization models within a large feasible region. An important issue is to identify an algorithm suitable for finding accurate solutions within a limited or acceptable time. To address this issue, four representative evolutionary algorithms, including genetic algorithm, differential evolution algorithm, particle swarm optimization algorithm, and gravitational search algorithm, are selected to combine individual IVBDs of alternatives and generate the minimum and maximum expected utilities of alternatives. By performing experiments with different numbers of criteria and grades, a comparative analysis of the four algorithms is provided with the aid of two indicators: accuracy and efficiency. Experimental results indicate that particle swarm optimization algorithm is the best among the four algorithms for combining individual IVBDs and generating the minimum and maximum expected utilities of alternatives.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document