4.7 Article

Double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and MULTIMOORA method: A case of study to evaluate the implementation status of haze controlling measures

Journal

INFORMATION FUSION
Volume 38, Issue -, Pages 22-34

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.inffus.2017.02.008

Keywords

Multiple criteria decision making; Double hierarchy linguistic term sets; Double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets; MULTIMOORA method; Haze controlling measures

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71571123, 71501135, 61273209, 71532007]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016T90863]
  3. Central University Basic Scientific Research Business Expenses Project [skgt201501, skqy201649]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTSs) have been studied by many scholars and are becoming gradually mature. However, some shortcomings of HFLTS also emerged. To describe the complex linguistic terms or linguistic term sets more accurately and reasonably, in this paper, we introduce the novel concepts named double hierarchy linguistic term set (DHLTS) and double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set (DHHFLTS). The operational laws and properties of the DHHFLTSs are developed as well. Afterwards, we investigate the multiple criteria decision making model with double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. We develop a double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic MULTIMOORA (DHHFL-MULTIMOORA) method to solve it. Furthermore, we apply the DHHFL-MULTIMOORA method to deal with a practical case about selecting the optimal city in China by evaluating the implementation status of haze controlling measures. Some comparisons between the DHHFL-MULTIMOORA method and the hesitant fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS method are provided to show the advantages of the proposed method. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available