4.6 Article

Evaluation of rapeseed varieties using novel integrated fuzzy PIPRECIA - Fuzzy MABAC model

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 16, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246857

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation
  2. Open Access Publication Fund of TU Berlin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Decision making is crucial in agriculture as selecting the right crop variety directly impacts the return on investment. This study developed a novel integrated fuzzy MCDM model based on fuzzy logic and evaluated rapeseed varieties, with Zorica variety showing the best performance.
Decision making is constantly present in agriculture. Choosing the wrong variety carries the risk that the investment in terms of sowing does not pay off at all. Therefore, it is necessary to choose the variety that gives the best results. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to apply multi-criteria decision-making of available varieties, which is, in this paper, done on the example of hybrid varieties of rapeseed that were created by selection at the Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops in Novi Sad. By applying fuzzy logic, a novel integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) model is developed and rapeseed varieties were evaluated. For determining four main and 20 subcriteria, fuzzy PIPRECIA (PIvot Pairwise RElative Criteria Importance Assessment) method has been applied based on fuzzy Bonferroni operator, while for ranking alternatives fuzzy MABAC (Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison) method has been used. The results obtained using the novel integrated fuzzy MCDM model showed that the variety A2 - Zorica has the best results, followed by A1 - NS Ras, while the worst results were seen by the variety A5 - Zlatna. These results were confirmed using other five fuzzy MCDM methods. Sensitivity analysis-changing criteria weights showed the worst results in the variety A6 - Jovana, which took last place in the application of 18 scenarios. The presented model and the results of this research will help farmers to solve this decision problem.

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

4.6
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