This paper presents a hybrid fuzzy multi criteria decision making model for z-numbers using intuitive vectorial centroid. There are two novelty aspects discussed: 1) development of intuitive vectorial centroid defuzzification and 2) development of hybrid fuzzy multi criteria decision making model based on consistent fuzzy preference relations and fuzzy technique for order performance by similarity to ideal solution for z-numbers. The latter are taken into consideration due to their capability of capturing human knowledge and extensive use in decision making problems under linguistic uncertainty. Fuzziness is not sufficient enough when dealing with real information and a degree of reliability of the information is very critical. The proposed combination of z-numbers with multi criteria decision making techniques facilitates the use of fuzzy linguistic aspects of human intuition in decision making. The proposed model is applied to a staff recruitment case study.
MardaniA., JusohA. and ZavadskasE.K., Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications – Two decades review from 1994 to 2014, Expert Syst Appl42(8) (2015), 4126–4148.
2.
Zhi-quanX., Application of Z-numbers in Multi-criteria Decision Making, in International Conference on Informantive and Cybernatics for Computational Social Systems (ICCSS), 2014, pp. 91–95.
3.
WangT.C. and ChenY.H., A new method on decision-making using fuzzy linguistic assessment variables and fuzzy preference relations, Inf Sci (Ny)178(19) (2008), 3755–3765.
4.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets-information and control-pdf, Information and Controls (1965), 338–353.
5.
DengH., Comparing and ranking fuzzy numbers using ideal solutions, Appl Math Model38(5–6) (2014), 1638–1646.
6.
ZadehL.A., A note on Z-numbers, Inf Sci (Ny)181(14) (2011), 2923–2932.
7.
KangB., WeiD., LiY. and DengY., A method of converting Z-number to classical fuzzy number, J Inf Comput Sci9(3) (2012), 703–709.
8.
AzadehA., SaberiM., AtashbarN.Z., ChangE. and PazhoheshfarP., Z-AHP: A Z-number extension of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process, 2013 7th IEEE Int Conf Digit Ecosyst Technol, 2013, pp. 141–147.
9.
FilevD.P. and YagerR.R., A generalized defuzzification method via bad distribution, Int J Intell Syst6 (1991), 687–697.
10.
Ku KhalifK.M.N. and GegovA., Generalised Fuzzy Bayesian Network with Adaptive Vectorial Centroid, in 16th World Congress of the International Fuzzy Systems Association (IFSA) and the 9th Conference of the European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology (EUSFLAT), 2015, pp. 757–764.
11.
VelasquezM. and HesterP.T., An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods, Int J Oper Res10(2) (2013), 56–66.
12.
SunC.-C., A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods, Expert Syst Appl37(12) (2010), 7745–7754.
13.
ShiY., KouG., LiY., WangG., PengY. and ShiY., FMCDM: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making hybrid approach to evaluate the damage level of typhoon: Integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS, Inf Sci Interact Sci (ICIS), 2010 3rd Int Conf, 2010, pp. 666–671.
14.
ZolfaniS.H., EsfahaniM.H., BitarafanM., ZavadskasE.K. and ArefiS.L., Developing a new hybrid MCDM method for selection of the optimal alternative of mechanical longitudinal ventilation of tunnel pollutants during automobile accidents, Transport28(1) (2013), 89–96.
15.
VinodhS., PrasannaM. and Hari PrakashN., Integrated Fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS for selecting the best plastic recycling method: A case study, Appl Math Model38(19–20) (2014), 4662–4672.
16.
Herrera-ViedmaE., HerreraF., ChiclanaF. and LuqueM., Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations, Eur J Oper Res154(1) (2004), 98–109.
17.
WangT.-C. and ChenY.-H., Consistent Fuzzy Linguistic Preference Relations for Computer Integrated Manufactory Systems Selection, Proc 9th Jt Conf Inf Sci, 2006, pp. 2–5.
18.
ZanakisS.H., SolomonA., WishartN. and DublishS., Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods, Eur J Oper Res107 (1998), 507–529.
19.
HwangC.-L. and YoonK., Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer, New York, 1981.
20.
AminiA. and AlinezhadA., Sensitivity analysis of TOPSIS technique: The results of change in the weight of one attribute on the final ranking of alternatives, J Optim Ind Eng7(2011) (2011), 23–28.
21.
BahremandA. and SmedtF., Distributed hydrological modeling and sensitivity analysis in Torysa Watershed, Slovakia, Water Resour Manag22(3) (2008), 393–408.
22.
PannellD.J., Sensitivity analysis of normative economic models: Theoretical framework and practical stratagies, J Agric Econ16 (1997), 139–152.
23.
ChengC.-H., A new approach for ranking fuzzy numbers by distance method, Fuzzy Sets Syst95(3) (1998), 307–317.
24.
KamisN.H., AbdullahK., MohamedH., SudinS. and IshakW.Z.A.W., Decision making models based on consistent fuzzy preference relations with different defuzzification methods, 2011 IEEE Colloq Humanit Sci Eng CHUSER 2011, no. Chuser, 2011, pp. 845–850.
25.
WangT.C. and ChenY.H., Applying consistent fuzzy preference relations to partnership selection, Omega35(4) (2007), 384–388.
26.
ZuoX., WangL. and YueY., A new similarity measure of generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers and its application on rotor fault diagnosis, Math Probl Eng2013 (2013), 1–10.
27.
YongD. and QiL., A TOPSIS-based centroid-index ranking method of fuzzy numbers and its application in decision-making, Int J Cybern Syst36(6) (2005), 581–595.
28.
ChenC.-T., Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets Syst114(1) (2000), 1–9.
29.
KrohlingR.A. and SantoE., TODIM and TOPSIS withZ-numbers. 2016.
30.
ZhengG., ZhuN., TianZ., ChenY. and SunB., Application of a trapezoidal fuzzy AHP method for work safety evaluation and early warning rating of hot and humid environments, Saf Sci50(2) (2012), 228–239.
31.
KangB., WeiD., LiY. and DengY., Decision making using Z-numbers under uncertain environment, J Comput Inf Syst8(7) (2012), 2807–2814.
