4.5 Article

A Visual Comparison Method and Similarity Measure for Probabilistic Linguistic Term Sets and Their Applications in Multi-criteria Decision Making

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FUZZY SYSTEMS
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages 1154-1169

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s40815-019-00632-y

Keywords

Probabilistic linguistic term sets; Possibility degree; Visual comparison; Similarity measure; Public opinion monitoring systems

Funding

  1. Graduate Teaching Reform Research Program of Chongqing Municipal Education Commission [YJG183074]
  2. Chongqing Social Science Planning Project [2018YBSH085]
  3. Major entrustment projects of the Chongqing Bureau of quality and technology supervision [CQZJZD2018001]
  4. Chongqing research and innovation project of graduate students [CYS18252, CYS17227]
  5. Science and Technology Research Project of Chongqing Municipal Education Commission [KJQN201800624]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The probabilistic linguistic term sets (PLTSs) are very powerful in solving the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems. The previous comparison methods associated with PLTSs are finite and unreasonable. Hence, developing a more effective way to compare PLTSs and proposing a reasonable decision-making method to cope with MCDM problems are important work of this paper. Firstly, a new possibility degree is proposed and a visual comparison method is given to present the process of comparing PLTSs. Subsequently, a similarity measure for PLTSs is also proposed to make up for the lack of similarity measure. Combining the new comparison method with the similarity measure, the TOPSIS is extended to solve real-life problems under probabilistic linguistic environment. Finally, a numerical example considers the selection of public opinion monitoring systems and the comparative analyses are shown to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available