4.1 Article

MULTI-CRITERIA GROUP DECISION-MAKING USING AN EXTENDED EDAS METHOD WITH INTERVAL TYPE-2 FUZZY SETS

期刊

E & M EKONOMIE A MANAGEMENT
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 48-68

出版社

TECHNICAL UNIV LIBEREC
DOI: 10.15240/tul/001/2017-1-004

关键词

Multi-criteria decision-making; interval type-2 fuzzy sets; fuzzy MCDM; EDAS method

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are very useful in the real-world decision-making problems. We are usually confronted with the decision-making process in an uncertain environment, and the fuzzy set theory is an efficient tool to handle this uncertainty. Interval type-2 fuzzy sets are one of the extensions of the fuzzy sets which are very flexible to model an uncertain environment. This study is related to MCDM problems within the context of interval type-2 fuzzy sets (IT2FSs). The evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) method is a new and efficient MCDM method, and assessment of alternatives in this method is based on the distance of them from average solution with respect to all criteria. In the EDAS method, each alternative has positive and negative distances which are used to determine the appraisal score of it. In this research, we present an extended EDAS method, which is named EDAS-IT2FSs, for dealing with multicriteria group decision-making problems with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Basic concepts of interval type-2 fuzzy sets and the arithmetic operations of trapezoidal IT2FSs are used to develop the extended EDAS method. A numerical example of multi-criteria subcontractor evaluation problem is used to illustrate the process of using the extended EDAS method. The example involves eight subcontractors that need to be evaluated with respect to seven criteria. A comparison and a sensitivity analysis based on different sets of criteria weights are also performed to show the validity of the proposed method. The results of these analyses show the efficiency and stability of the extended EDAS method.

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

4.1
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