4.6 Article

Covering-based intuitionistic fuzzy rough sets and applications in multi-attribute decision-making

Journal

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE REVIEW
Volume 53, Issue 1, Pages 671-701

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10462-018-9674-7

Keywords

Covering based IF rough sets; IF beta-neighborhood; IFC beta-neighborhood; IF-TOPSIS methodology; MADM

Funding

  1. NNSFC [71571090, 11461025, 11561023]
  2. National Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province of China [2017JM7022]
  3. Key Strategic Project of Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [JBZ170601]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Covering based intuitionistic fuzzy (IF) rough set is a generalization of granular computing and covering based rough sets. By combining covering based rough sets, IF sets and fuzzy rough sets, we introduce three classes of coverings based IF rough set models via IF beta-neighborhoods and IF complementary beta-neighborhood (IFC beta-neighborhood). The corresponding axiomatic systems are investigated, respectively. In particular, the rough and precision degrees of covering based IF rough set models are discussed. The relationships among these types of coverings based IF rough set models and covering based IF rough set models proposed by Huang et al. (Knowl Based Syst 107:155-178, 2016). Based on the theoretical analysis for coverings based IF rough set models, we put forward intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS (IF-TOPSIS) methodology to multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) problem with the evaluation of IF information problem. An effective example is to illustrate the proposed methodology. Finally, we deal with MADM problem with the evaluation of fuzzy information based on CFRS models. By comparative analysis, we find that it is more effective to deal with MADM problem with the evaluation of IF information based on CIFRS models than the one with the evaluation of fuzzy information based on CFRS models.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available