4.7 Article

A novel outranking based multi criteria group decision making methodology integrating ELECTRE and VIKOR under intuitionistic fuzzy environment

期刊

EXPERT SYSTEMS WITH APPLICATIONS
卷 119, 期 -, 页码 36-50

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2018.10.039

关键词

Multi criteria decision making; Intuitionistic fuzzy set theory; ELECTRE; VIKOR; Product/service ranking; Group decision making

资金

  1. Dokuz Eylul University Scientific Research Coordination Unit [KB.FEN.026]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposes a new group decision making (GDM) methodology to solve outranking problems efficiently under uncertainty integrating multi criteria decision making (MCDM) and intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS) theory. To this aim, ELECTRE I, an outranking based MCDM approach is extended with VIKOR method, an ideal solution based approach, under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. The methodology utilizes pairwise comparison and outranking relation concepts of ELECTRE methods to construct different concordance and discordance sets in order to reflect preferences of decision makers effectively. By the help of similarities between concordance and discordance characteristics of ELECTRE and maximum group utility and minimum individual regret characteristics of VIKOR, the methodology enables the intuitionistic fuzzy ELECTRE to overcome its weakness in ranking process and presents complete ranking. In addition, this study employs entropy method to identify the weights of criteria and decision makers, and weighted distance approach to determine the weights of different concordance sets. Utilizing these methods leads to specifying these weights objectively. The applicability of the proposed approach is explored by an illustrative example on supplier selection problem by explaining the method step by step. Furthermore, four computational experiments are conducted in order to demonstrate its applicability to the other areas and the results are compared. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据