4.5 Article

Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Archimedean Aggregation Operators in Decision Making with the Dempster-Shafer Belief Structure

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FUZZY SYSTEMS
Volume 21, Issue 5, Pages 1330-1348

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s40815-019-00660-8

Keywords

Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence; Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets; Average operator; Decision making

Funding

  1. Special Funds of Taishan Scholars Project in Shandong Province [ts201511045]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71771140, 61603010, 61773029, 71471172, 61273230, 61603011]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We propose a novel method for hesitant fuzzy linguistic decision making by utilizing Dempster-Shafer (D-S) theory of evidence. First, we propose some novel operations of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTSs) on the basis of closed operations on linguistic 2-tuples and distribution linguistic average aggregation (DLAA) operators. These novel operations not only avoid information loss and operational results exceeding the boundary of linguistic term sets, but also make the aggregation results interpretable. Then, we define the hesitant fuzzy linguistic Archimedean weighted arithmetic mean (HFLAWAM) and hesitant fuzzy linguistic Archimedean weighted geometric mean (HFLAWGM) operators of HFLTSs. These two proposed operators are able to overcome the shortcomings of the existing approaches to multicriteria decision making (MCDM) with HFLTSs. Then, to take into account the novel operations of HFLTSs and the MCDM under uncertainty, we propose the belief structure-HFLAWAM (BS-HFLAWAM) and belief structure-HFLAWGM (BS-HFLAWGM) operators of HFLTSs. After that, we create an approach to handle the hesitant fuzzy linguistic MCDM problems in light of proposed operators. Finally, we apply the created approach to a MCDM problem regarding political management of a country.

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