A decision-making framework under probabilistic linguistic term set for multi-criteria group decision-making problem

Abstract

This paper focuses on proposing a new decision framework under probabilistic linguistic term set (PLTS) for rational decision making. The PLTS concept is a generalization of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set (HFLTS) which overcomes the limitation of HFLTS by associating occurring probability to each linguistic term. Initially, a new aggregation operator is presented for fusing decision makers’ (DMs) preferences. Following this, a new extension is put forward for statistical variance (SV) method under PLTS for criteria weight calculation and a new extension is presented for WASPAS (weighted arithmetic sum product assessment) method under PLTS context for ranking objects. The applicability of the proposed decision framework is demonstrated by using a numerical example and the strength and weakness of the proposal are investigated by comparison with other state-of-the-art methods.

Keywords

Decision making probabilistic linguistic term set statistical variance and WASPAS method

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

L.A.

Zadeh , The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I, Inf Sci (Ny) 8 (1975), 199–249. Doi: 10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5

L.A.

Zadeh , Fuzzy logic systems: Origin, concepts, and trends, Computer Science Division Department of EECS UC, Berkeley, 2004, pp. 16–18.

L.A.

Zadeh , Fuzzy sets, Inf Control 8 (1965), 338–353.

Herrera ,

Herrera-Viedma and

J.L.

Verdegay , Linguistic measures based on fuzzy coincidence for reaching consensus in group decision making, Int J Approx Reason 16 (1997), 309–334. Doi: 10.1016/S0888-613X(96)00121-1

R.M.

Rodriguez ,

Martinez ,

Herrera , Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making, IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20 (2012), 109–119. Doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2011.2170076

Zhang ,

Dong and

Xu , Consistency and consensus measures for linguistic preference relations based on distribution assessments, Inf Fusion 17 (2014), 46–55. Doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2012.01.006

Pang ,

Wang and

Xu , Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making, Inf Sci (Ny) 369 (2016), 128–143. Doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2016.06.021

Wu ,

C.C.

Li ,

Chen and

Dong , Group decision making based on linguistic distributions and hesitant assessments: Maximizing the support degree with an accuracy constraint, Inf Fusion 41 (2018), 151–160. Doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2017.08.008

Zhang ,

Liang ,

Gao and

Zhang , The optimization-based aggregation and consensus with minimum-cost in group decision making under incomplete linguistic distribution context, Knowledge-Based Syst (2018). doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.05.038

10.

Bai ,

Zhang ,

Qian and

Wu , Comparisons of probabilistic linguistic term sets for multi-criteria decision making, Knowledge-Based Syst 119 (2016), 284–291. Doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2016.12.020

11.

Gou and

Xu , Novel basic operational laws for linguistic terms, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and probabilistic linguistic term sets, Inf Sci (Ny) 372 (2016), 407–427. Doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2016.08.034

12.

Zhai ,

Xu and

Liao , Probabilistic linguistic vector-term set and its application in group decision making with multi-granular linguistic information, Appl Soft Comput J 49 (2016), 801–816. Doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2016.08.044

13.

Zhang and

Xing , Probabilistic linguistic VIKOR method to evaluate green supply chain initiatives, Sustainability 9 (2017), 1231. doi: 10.3390/su9071231

14.

Zhang ,

Xu ,

Wang and

Liao , Consistency-based risk assessment with probabilistic linguistic preference relation, Appl Soft Comput J 49 (2016), 817–833. Doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2016.08.045

15.

Lin ,

Xu ,

Zhai and

Yao , Multi-attribute group decision-making under probabilistic uncertain linguistic environment, J Oper Res Soc (2017), 1–14. doi: 10.1057/s41274-017-0182-y

16.

Liao ,

Jiang ,

Xu ,

Xu and

Herrera , A probabilistic linguistic linear programming method in hesitant qualitative multiple criteria decision making, Inf Sci (Ny) 416 (2017), 341–355. Doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2017.06.035

17.

Wu and

Liao , An approach to quality function deployment based on probabilistic linguistic term sets and ORESTE method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making, Inf Fusion 43 (2018), 13–26. Doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2017.11.008

18.

Wu ,

Liao ,

Xu ,

Hafezalkotob and

Herrera , Probabilistic linguistic MULTIMOORA: A multi-criteria decision making method based on the probabilistic linguistic expectation function and the improved borda rule, IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 6706 (2018), 1–16. Doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2843330

19.

Kobina ,

Liang and

He , Probabilistic linguistic power aggregation operators for multi-criteria group decision making, Symmetry (Basel) 9 (2017), 1–21. Doi: 10.3390/sym9120320

20.

Liu and

Teng , Some Muirhead mean operators for probabilistic linguistic term sets and their applications to multiple attribute decision-making, Appl Soft Comput J 68 (2018), 396–431. Doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2018.03.027

21.

Kao , Weight determination for consistently ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis, Appl Math Model 34 (2010), 1779–1787. Doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2009.09.022

22.

Mardani ,

Nilashi ,

Zakuan ,

Loganathan ,

Soheilirad ,

M.Z.M.

Saman , et al., A systematic review and meta-Analysis of SWARA and WASPAS methods: Theory and applications with recent fuzzy developments, Appl Soft Comput J 57 (2017), 265–292. Doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2017.03.045

23.

F.R.

Lima Junior ,

Osiro and

L.C.R.

Carpinetti , A comparison between Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS methods to supplier selection, Appl Soft Comput J 21 (2014) 194–209. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.03.014

24.

Herrera ,

Herrera-Viedma and

J.L.

Verdegay , A sequential selection process in group decision making with a linguistic assessment approach, Inf Sci (Ny) 239 (1995), 223–239.

25.

Xia and

Xu , Entropy/cross entropy-based group decision making under intuitionistic fuzzy environment, Inf Fusion 13 (2012), 31–47. Doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2010.12.001

26.

T.L.

Saaty , The Analytic Hierarchy Process, 1980.

27.

T.L.

Saaty , Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process, Int J Serv Sci 1 (2008), 83. doi: 10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590

28.

T.L.

Saaty , How to make a decision: Analytical hierarchy process, Eur J Oper Res 48 (1990), 9–26.

29.

Hafezalkotob and

Hafezalkotob , Fuzzy entropy-weighted MULTIMOORA method for materials selection, J Intell Fuzzy Syst 31 (2016), 1211–1226. Doi: 10.3233/IFS-162186

30.

Zhang ,

Wang and

Wang , Objective attributes weights determining based on shannon information entropy in hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making, Math Probl Eng 2014 (2014). doi: 10.1155/2014/463930

31.

Shemshadi ,

Shirazi ,

Toreihi and

M.J.

Tarokh , A fuzzy VIKOR method for supplier selection based on entropy measure for objective weighting, Expert Syst Appl 38 (2011), 12160–12167. Doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.027

32.

Zhu ,

Xu and

Xu , Deriving a ranking from hesitant fuzzy preference relations under group decision making, IEEE Trans Cybern 44 (2014), 1328–1337. Doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2013.2283021

33.

Liu ,

F.T.S.

Chan and

Ran , Decision making for the selection of cloud vendor: An improved approach under group decision-making with integrated weights and objective/subjective attributes, Expert Syst Appl 55 (2016), 37–47. Doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2016.01.059

34.

R.V.

Rao ,

B.K.

Patel and

Parnichkun , Industrial robot selection using a novel decision making method considering objective and subjective preferences, Rob Auton Syst 59 (2011), 367–375. Doi: 10.1016/j.robot.2011.01.005

35.

Chakraborty and

E.K.

Zavadskas , Applications of WASPAS method in manufacturing decision making, Informatica 25 (2014), 1–20.

36.

Opricovic and

G.H.

Tzeng , Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, Eur J Oper Res 156 (2004), 445–455. Doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1

37.

T.L.

Saaty and

M.S.

Ozdemir , Why the magic number seven plus or minus two, Math Comput Model 38 (2003), 233–244. Doi: 10.1016/S0895-7177(03)90083-5

38.

Zhang ,

Dong ,

Palomares-Carrascosa and

Zhou , Failure mode and effect analysis in a linguistic context: A consensus-based multiattribute group decision-making approach, IEEE Trans Reliab (2018), 1–17. doi: 10.1109/TR.2018.2869787

39.

Zhang ,

Dong and

Chen , The 2-rank consensus reaching model in the multigranular linguistic multiple-attribute group decision-making, IEEE Trans Syst Man, Cybern Syst (2017), 1–15. doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2017.2694429

40.

C.C.

Li ,

Dong ,

Herrera ,

Herrera-Viedma and

Martínez , Personalized individual semantics in computing with words for supporting linguistic group decision making. An application on consensus reaching, Inf Fusion 33 (2017), 29–40. Doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2016.04.005

41.

C.C.

Li ,

R.M.

Rodríguez ,

Martínez ,

Dong and

Herrera , Personalized individual semantics based on consistency in hesitant linguistic group decision making with comparative linguistic expressions, Knowledge-Based Syst 145 (2018), 1–14. Doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.01.011

42.

C.C.

Li ,

Dong and

Herrera , A consensus model for large-scale linguistic group decision making with a feedback recommendation based on clustered personalized individual semantics and opposing consensus groups, IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst (2018), 1–13. doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2857720

43.

Dong ,

Liu ,

Liang ,

Chiclana and

Herrera-Viedma , Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making, Omega 75 (2018), 154–164. Doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2017.02.008

44.

Liu ,

Dong ,

Liang ,

Chiclana and

Herrera-Viedma , Multiple attribute strategic weight manipulation with minimum cost in a group decision making context with interval attribute weights information, IEEE Trans Syst Man, Cybern Syst (2018), 1–12. doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2018.2874942