Hesitant fuzzy sets (HFSs) present a general structure to express the uncertain concepts and data that have been served as in most of the generalizations of fuzzy sets. In this research article, we introduce a novel hybrid model called hesitant m-polar fuzzy sets (HmF-sets), which is a reasonable combination of HFSs with m-polar fuzzy sets (mF sets). It is the generalization of the concept HFSs, in which the membership degrees of an element of given set deals the m different numeric and fuzzy values that enables to deal the hesitancy of multipolar information. Hesitancy integrates the conformity for the analysis of given data, and an mF format concedes to severalize the sources of multi-polar information. We highlight and explore some useful properties, construct fundamental operations and investigate comparison laws of HmF-sets. Moreover, we develop the hesitant m-polar fuzzy TOPSIS approach for multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM), which is the natural extension of TOPSIS method and used to rank and choose the best alternative under HmF positive and negative ideal solutions to this framework. We describe applications of HmF-sets in group decision-making and apply our proposed method in real life examples to show its efficiency. Finally, we develop an algorithm that implements our decision-making procedure by using computer programming.
AdeelA., AkramM., KoamA.N.A., Group decision-making based on m-polar fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS method, Symmetry11(6) (2019), 735.
2.
AdeelA., AkramM., AhmedI., NazarK., Novel m-polar fuzzy linguistic ELECTRE-I method for group decision-making, Symmetry11(4) (2019), 471.
3.
AkramM., m-polar fuzzy graphs-theory, methods & applications, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing371, Springer (2019), ISBN 978-3-030-03750-5, 1–284.
4.
AkramM., AdeelA., Novel hybrid decision-making methods based on mF rough information, Granular Computing (2018), doi:10.1007/s41066-018-00142-6, 1–17.
5.
AkramM., AdeelA., TOPSIS approach for MAGDM based on interval-valued hesitant fuzzy N-soft environment, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems21(3) (2019), 993–1009.
6.
AkramM., AdeelA., AlcantudJ.C.R., Fuzzy N-soft sets: A novel model with applications, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems35(4) (2018), 4757–4771.
7.
AkramM., AdeelA., AlcantudJ.C.R., Multi-criteria group decision-making using an m-polar hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS approach, Symmetry11(6) (2019), 795.
8.
AkramM., AdeelA., AlcantudJ.C.R., Hesitant fuzzy N-soft sets: A new model with applications in decision-making, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems36(6) (2019), 6113–6127.
9.
AkramM., AdeelA., AlcantudJ.C.R., Group decision-making methods based on hesitant N-soft sets, Expert Systems with Applications115 (2019), 95–105.
10.
AkramM., AliG., AlshehriN.O., A new multi-attribute decision-making method based on m-polar fuzzy soft rough sets, Symmetry9(11) (2017), 271.
11.
AkramM., AliG., WaseemN., DavvazB., Decision-making methods based on hybrid mF models, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems35(3) (2018), 3387–3403.
12.
AkramM., WaseemN., LiuP., Novel approach in decision-making with m-polar fuzzy ELECTRE-I, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems21(4) (2019), 1117–1129.
13.
Akram ShumaizaM. and SmarandacheF., Decision-making with bipolar neutrosophic topsis and bipolar neutrosophic ELECTRE-I, Axioms7(2) (2018), 33.
14.
AlcantudJ.C.R., GiarlottaA., Necessary and possible hesitant fuzzy sets: a novel model for group decision-making, Information Fusion46 (2019), 63–76.
15.
AlcantudJ.C.R., TorraV., Decomposition theorems and extension principles for hesitant fuzzy sets, Information Fusion41 (2018), 48–56.
16.
AlghamdaM.A., AlshehriaN.O., AkramM., Multi-criteria decision-making methods in bipolar fuzzy environment, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems20(6) (2018), 2057–2064.
17.
AshtianiB., HaghighiradF., MakuiA., MontazerG., Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets, Applied Soft Computing9(2) (2009), 457–461.
18.
ChangC.C., Algebraic analysis of many valued logics, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society88 (1958), 467–490.
19.
ChenC.T., Extension of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems1(114) (2000), 1–9.
20.
ChenJ., LiS., MaS., WangX., m-Polar fuzzy sets: An extension of bipolar fuzzy sets, Scientific World Journal (2014), Article ID 416530,8 pages. DOI: 10.1155/2014/416530.
21.
ChenN., XuZ., XiaM., Interval-valued hesitant preference relations and their applications to group decision-making, Knowledge-Based System37 (2013), 528–540.
22.
GargH., KaurG., Extended TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision-making problems under cubic intuitionistic fuzzy environment, Scientia Iranica (2018). doi:10.24200/SCI.2018.5307.1194.
23.
GargH., KumarK., A novel exponential distance and its based TOPSIS method for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets using connection number of SPA theory, Artificial Intelligence Review (2018). doi:10.1007/s10462-018-9668-5, 1–30.
24.
GrigoliaR.S., An algebraic analysis of n-valued systems of Lukasiewicz-Tarski, Proceedings of the University of Tbilisi A6–7 (1973), 121–132.
LeeR.C.T., Fuzzy logic and the resolution principle, Readings in Fuzzy Sets for Intelligent Systems (1993), 442–452.
27.
LiuP., ChenS.M., WangP., Multiple-attribute group decision-making based on q-rung orthopair fuzzy power maclaurin symmetric mean operators, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Systems (2018). doi:10.1109/TSMC.2018.2852948, 1–16.
28.
LiuP., TengF., Probabilistic linguistic TODIM method for selecting products through online product reviews, Information Sciences485 (2019), 441–455.
29.
LiuP., TengF., Some Muirhead mean operators for probabilistic linguistic term sets and their applications to multiple attribute decision-making, Applied Soft Computing68 (2018), 396–431.
30.
LiuP., WangP., Multiple-attribute decision-making based on Archimedean Bonferroni Operators of q-rung orthopair fuzzy numbers, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems27(5) (2018), 834–848.
31.
LiuP., WangP., Some q-rung orthopair fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multiple-attribute decision making, International Journal of Intelligent Systems33(2) (2018), 259–280.
32.
MengF., ChenX., ZhangQ., Multi-attribute decision analysis under a linguistic hesitant fuzzy environment, Information Sciences267 (2014), 287–305.
33.
MandalP., RanadiveA.S., Hesitant bipolar-valued fuzzy sets and bipolar-valued hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications in multi-attribute group decision-making, Granular Computing (2018). doi:10.1007/s41066-018-0118-1, 1–25.
34.
RenF., KongM., PeiZ., A new hesitant fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS method for group multi-criteria linguistic decision-making, Symmetry9(12) (2017), 289.
35.
RehmanN., ShahN., AliM.I., ParkC., Uncertainty measurement for neighborhood based soft covering rough graphs with applications, Revista de la Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Serie A. Matemáticas, (2019). doi:10.1007/s13398-019-00632-5.
36.
Rodrí guezR., BedregalB., BustinceH., DongY., FarhadiniaB., KahramanC., NezL.M., TorraV., XuY., XuZ. and HerreraF., A position and perspective analysis of hesitant fuzzy sets on information fusion in decision-making, towards high quality progress, Information Fusion29 (2016), 89–97.
37.
RoszkowskaE., Multi-criteria decision-making models by applying the TOPSIS method to crisp and interval data, Multiple Criteria Decision Making/University of Economics in Katowice6 (2011), 200–230.
38.
RoszkowskaE., WachowiczT., Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems, European Journal of Operational Research242(3) (2015), 920–932.
39.
ShihH., ShyurH., LeeE., An extension of TOPSIS for group decision-making, Mathematical and Computer Modelling45(7–8) (2007), 801–813.
40.
TengF., LiuZ., LiuP., Some power Maclaurin symmetric mean aggregation operators based on Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic numbers and their application to group decision-making, International Journal of Intelligent Systems33(9) (2018), 1949–1985.
41.
TorraV., Hesitant fuzzy sets, International Journal of Intelligent Systems25(6) (2010), 529–539.
42.
TorraV., NarukawaY., On hesitant fuzzy sets and decisions, International Conference on Fuzzy Systems1(3) (2009), 1378–1382.
43.
WangY.J and LeeH.S., Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making, Computers & Mathematics with Applications53(11) (2007), 1762–1772.
44.
WangF., LiX., ChenX., Hesitant fuzzy soft set and its applications in multicriteria decision making, Journal of Applied Mathematics (2014), Article ID 643785, 10 pages.
45.
XiaM.M., XuZ.S., Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision-making, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning52(3) (2011), 395–407.
46.
XiaM., XuZ., ChenN., Some hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators with their application in group decision-making, Group Decision and Negotiation22(2) (2013), 259–297.
47.
XuD.L., An introduction and survey of the evidential reasoning approach for multiple criteria decision analysis, Annals of Operations Research195(1) (2012), 163–187.
48.
XuZ., ZhangX., Hesitant fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making based on TOPSIS with incomplete weight information, Knowledge-Based Systems52 (2013), 53–64.
49.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8(3) (1965), 338–353.
50.
ZhangW.R., Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations: a computational framework forcognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis, In Fuzzy Information Processing Society Biannual Conference, Industrial Fuzzy Control and Intelligent Systems Conference, and the NASA Joint Technology Workshop on Neural Networks and Fuzzy Logic (1994), 305–309. IEEE.
51.
ZhangS., XuZ., HeY., Operations and integrations of probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information in decision-making, Information Fusion38 (2017), 1–11.
52.
ZhuB., XuZ.S., XuJ.P., Deriving a ranking from hesitant fuzzy preference relations under group decision making, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics44(8) (2014), 1328–119.
