A huge range of human decisions is involved bipolar subjective thoughts. For illustration, effects and side effects are two different aspects of decision analysis. The equilibrium and mutual coexistence of these two aspects are treated as a key for balanced social environment. A verity of bipolar fuzzy decision making with different technique is available for bipolar fuzzy characterizations of the universe of options that depend on a limited number of grades. So, the concept of simple bipolar fuzzy set is insufficient to provide the information about the occurrence of ranking with accuracy because information is limited. In this regard, we use cubic bipolar fuzzy sets (CBFSs) as the generalization of bipolar fuzzy sets. In human decisions, the second important part is ranking of alternatives obtained after evaluation. The motivation behind this research is to develop an appropriate aggregation method which is simple reliable and efficient enough to handle cubic bipolar fuzzy data. We propose aggregation operators, including, cubic bipolar fuzzy weighted averaging operator, cubic bipolar fuzzy ordered weighted averaging operator and cubic bipolar fuzzy hybrid weighted averaging operator for -order and -order. We demonstrate simplicity and efficiency of proposed aggregation operators and algorithm by discussing multi-attribute group decision making (MAGDM) problem under cubic bipolar fuzzy information. We also discuss the comparison analysis of the proposed method of aggregation.
AkramM., Bipolar fuzzy graphs with applications, Knowl Based Syst39 (2013), 1–8.
3.
AkramM., AlshehriN., DavvazB. and AshrafA., Bipolar fuzzy digraphs in decision support systems, J Mult Valued Log Soft Comput27(56) (2016), 531–551.
4.
AkramM. and ArshadM., A novel trapezoidal bipolar fuzzy TOPSIS method for group decision-making, Group Decision and Negotiation (2018), 1–20. doi.org:/10.1007/s10726-018-9606-6
.
5.
ArvaP. and CsukasB., Computer-aided process synthesis by fuzzy valuated structures, Comput Chem Eng12(2/3) (1988), 215–224.
6.
AtanassovK.T., Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems20 (1986), 87–96.
7.
BegI. and RashidT., Group decision making using intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy sets, Int J Fuzzy Log Intell Syst14 (2014), 181–187.
8.
ÇağmanN., EnginogluS. and ÇitakF., Fuzzy soft set theory and its applications, Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems8 (2011), 137–147.
9.
ÇağmanN., ÇitakF. and EnginogluS., FP-soft set theory and its applications, Annals of Fuzzy Math and Informatics2 (2011), 219–226.
10.
ChenJ., LiS., MaS. and WangX., m-Polar fuzzy sets: An extension of bipolar fuzzy sets, The Scientific World Journal (2014), 1–8.
11.
DuboisD. and PradeH., Fuzzy sets: A survey of engineering applications, Comput Chem Eng17(1) (1993), 373–380.
12.
DuboisD. and PradeH., An introduction to bipolar representations of information and preferences, Int J Intell Syst23(8) (2008), 866–877.
13.
FahmiA., AminF., SmarandacheF., KhanM. and HassanN., Triangular cubic hesitant fuzzy einstein hybrid weighted averaging operator and its application to decision making, Symmetry10 (2018), 658. doi:10.3390/sym10110658www.mdpi.com/journal/symmetry
14.
FahmiA., AminF., KhanM. and SmarandacheF., Group decision making based on triangular neutrosophic cubic fuzzy einstein hybrid weighted averaging operators, Symmetry11 (2019), 180. doi:10.3390/sym11020180
15.
FengF., LiC., DavvazB. and AliM.I., Soft sets combined with fuzzy sets and rough sets, a tentative approach, Soft Computing14(9) (2010), 899–911.
16.
FengF., FujitaH., AliM.I. and YagerR.R., Life Fellow, IEEE and Xiaoyan Liu, Another view on generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets and related multiattribute decision making methods, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems (2018), 1–15.
17.
GargH. and AroraR., Dual hesitant fuzzy soft aggregation operators and their applicatio in decision-making, Cognitive Computation10(5) (2018), 769–789.
18.
GargH. and AroraR., A nonlinear-programming methodology for multi-attribute decision making problem with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets information, Applied Intelligence48(8) (2018), 2031–2046.
19.
GargH. and AroraR., Novel scaled prioritized intuitionistic fuzzy soft interaction averaging aggregation operators and their application to multi criteria decision-making, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence (EAAI)71 (2018), 100–112.
20.
GargH. and AroraR., Generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft power aggregation operator based on t-norm and their application in multicriteria decision-making, International Journal of Intelligent Systems34(2) (2019), 215–246.
21.
GhodsypourS.H. and BrienC.O., A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming, International Journal of Production Economics56(57) (1998), 199–212.
22.
GuiffridaA.L. and NagiR., Fuzzy set theory applications in production management research: A literature survey, J Intell Manuf9 (1998), 39–56.
23.
GulZ., Some bipolar fuuzy aggregation operator and their application in multicriteria group decision making, Mphil Thesis (2015).
24.
GülçinB. and ÇifçiC., A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers, Expert Systems with Applications39(3) (2012), 3000–3011.
25.
HwangC.L. and YoonK., Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Application, Springer, New York, 1981.
26.
HwangC.L., YoonK., Methods for multiple attribute decision-making. In: FandelG. and TrockelW. (eds), Multile attribute decision making. Springer, Berlin. 1981, pp. 58–191.
27.
JunY.B., KimC.S. and YangK.O., Cubic set, Annals of Fuzzy Math and Informatics4(1) (2012), 83–98.
28.
MadoreJ., Fuzzy physics, Annals of Physics219(1) (2004), 187–198.
29.
LeeK.M., Bipolar-valued fuzzy sets and their basic opperations, Procceeding International Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, 2000, pp. 307–317.
30.
LeeK.M. and CiosK.J., Comparison of interval-valued fuzzy sets, intuitionistic fuzzy set and bipolar valued fuzzy set, Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent14(2) (2004), 125–129.
31.
LiuY., DongY., LiangH., ChiclanaF. and Herrera-ViedmaE., Multiple attribute strategic weight manipulation with minimum cost in a group decision making context with interval attribute weights information, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics: Systems. doi:10.1109/TSMC.2018.2874942
32.
MajiP.K., BiswasR. and RoyA.R., Fuzzy soft sets, Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics9(3) (2001), 589–602.
33.
MajiP.K., BiswasR. and RoyA.R., Intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets, Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics9(3) (2001), 677–691.
34.
MajiP.K., BiswasR. and RoyA.R., An application of soft sets in decision making problem, Computer and Mathematics with Applications44 (2002), 1077–1083.
35.
MahmoodT., MehmoodF. and KhanQ., Multiple croteria decision making based on bipolar valued fuzzy set, Annals of Fuzzy Math and Informatics (2016).
36.
MolodtsovD., Soft set theory-first results, Computers and Mathematics with Applications37 (1999), 9–31.
37.
PengX. and SelvachandranG., Pythagorean fuzzy information measures and their applications, Int Journal of Intelligent Systems (2017), 1–39. doi:10.1002/int.21880
38.
PhuongN.H. and KreinovichV., Fuzzy logic and its applications in medicine, Int J Med Inform62(2-3) (2011), 165–173.
39.
RiazM. and NaeemK., Measurable soft mappings, Punjab University Journal of Mathematics48(2) (2016), 19–34.
40.
RiazM. and HashmiM.R., Fixed points of fuzzy neutrosophic soft mapping with decision making, Fixed Point Theory and Applications7 (2018), 1–10.
41.
RiazM. and TehrimS.T., Certain properties of bipolar fuzzy soft topology via Q-neighborhood, Punjab University Journal of Mathematics51(3) (2019), 113–131.
42.
RiazM. and TehrimS.T., Cubic bipolar fuzzy ordered weighted geometric aggregation operators and their application using internal and external cubic bipolar fuzzy data, Computational & Applied Mathematics (2019). doi.org/10.1007/s40314-019-0843-3
43.
RiazM.,
HashmiM.R. and FarooqA., Fuzzy parameterized fuzzy soft metric spaces, Journal of Mathematical Analysis9(2) (2018), 25–36.
44.
RiazM.,
CagmanN.,
ZareefI. and AslamM., N-soft topology and its applications to multi-criteria group decision making, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems36(6) (2019), 6521–6536.
45.
RiazM.,
DavvazB.,
FirdousA. and FakharF., Novel concepts of soft rough set topology with applications, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems36(4) (2019) 3579–3590.
46.
WeiG., AlsaadiF.E., HayatT. and AlsaediA., Bipolar fuzzy hamacher aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making, Int J Fuzzy Syst (2017). doi:10.1007/s40815-017-0338-6
47.
XiaM. and XuZ., Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision making, Int J Approx Reason52 (2011), 395–407.
48.
XiaM., XuZ. and ChenN., Some hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators with their application in group decision making, Group Decis Negot22 (2013), 259–279.
49.
YagerR.R., On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics18(1) (1988), 183–190.
50.
YagerR.R., Pythagorean fuzzy subsets, Proceedings of the Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting, 2013, pp. 57–61.
51.
YuW., ZhangZ., ZhongQ. and SunL., Extended TODIM for multi-criteria group decision making based on unbalanced hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets, Computers & Industrial Engineering114 (2017), 316–328.
52.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8(3) (1965), 338–353.
53.
ZadehL.A., Similarity relations and fuzzy ordering, Information Science3 (1971), 199–249.
54.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy logic and approximate reasoning, Synthese30(3-4) (1975), 407–428.
55.
ZadehL.A., The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I, Inf Sci8(3) (1975), 199–249.
56.
ZhanJ. and AlcantudJ.C.R., A novel type of soft rough covering and its application to multicriteria group decision-making, Artificial Intelligence Review (2018). doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9617-3
57.
ZhanJ., SunB. and AlcantudJ.C.R., Covering based multigranulation (I,T)-fuzzy rough set models and applications in multi-attribute group decision-making, Information Sciences 476 (2019), 290–318.
58.
ZhangW.R., Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations, A computational framework for cognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis, In: Proceedings of IEEE Conference Fuzzy Information Processing Society Biannual Conference, 1994, pp. 305–309.
59.
ZhangW.R., NPN fuzzy sets and NPN qualitative algebra: A computational framework for bipolar cognitive modeling and multiagerit decision analysis, IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet Part Cybern26(4) (1996), 561–574.
ZhangX. and XuZ., Extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with pythagorean fuzzy sets, International Journal of Intelligent Systems29 (2014), 1061–1078.
62.
ZhangX.W., Bipolar-value fuzzy soft lie subalgebras, IOP Conf Series Material Science and Engineering231 (2017), 1–9.
63.
ZhangH., DongY. and ChenX., The 2-rank consensus reaching model in the multigranular linguistic multiple-attribute group decision-making, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems48 (2018), 2080–2094.
64.
ZhangZ., KouX., TuW. and GuoC., On priority weights and consistency for incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations, Knowledge-Based Systems143 (2018), 115–126.
65.
ZhangZ. and GuoC., Deriving priority weights from intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations under group decision-making settings, Journal of the Operational Research Society68(12) (2017), 1582–1599.
66.
ZhangH., DongY., ChiclanaF. and YuS., Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design, European Journal of Operational Research (2018). doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.11.052
67.
ZhangB., DongY. and Herrere-ViedmaE., Group decision making with heterogeneous preference structures: An automatic mechanism to support consensus reaching, Group Decision and Negotiation (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-018-09609-y.
68.
ZhangB., LiangH. and ZhangG., Reaching a consensus with minimum adjustment in MAGDM with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets, Information Fusion42 (2018), 12–23.
69.
LiuY.,
ZhangH.,
WuY., and DongY., Ranking range-based approach to MADM under incomplete context and its application in venture investment evaluation, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, DOI: 10.3846/tede.2019.10296 (in press).
