4.4 Article

Likelihood-based assignment methods for multiple criteria decision analysis based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets

期刊

FUZZY OPTIMIZATION AND DECISION MAKING
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 425-457

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10700-015-9208-6

关键词

Likelihood-based assignment method; Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy set; Mean likelihood determination method; Multiple criteria decision analysis; Comparative analysis

资金

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology [MOST 102-2410-H-182-013-MY3]
  2. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital [BMRP 574]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this paper is to develop useful likelihood-based assignment methods for addressing multiple criteria decision-making problems within the environment of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Based on the likelihoods of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations, this paper determines the mean likelihoods of outranking relations and presents a mean likelihood determination method for generating a set of criterion-wise rankings of alternatives. By employing the concepts of rank frequency matrices and (ordinary) rank contribution matrices, this paper establishes a likelihood-based linear assignment model for multiple criteria decision analysis in the interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy context. Additionally, this paper propounds two likelihood-based assignment models for handling incomplete and conflicting certain information of importance weights. These models can transform the criterion-wise ranks into the overall ranks for determining the optimal priority ranking of the alternatives. The feasibility and applicability of the proposed methods are illustrated with a practical problem of selecting a bridge construction method which involves various preference types. Finally, this paper conducts a comparative analysis with previous assignment-based methods in an interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy setting to validate the effectiveness and advantages of the proposed methods.

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

4.4
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