As COVID-19 swept through, production in various industries was affected. Epidemic control leads to logistical disruptions from time to time and suppliers have to make production and shipping decisions after analyzing the customer’s situation. Therefore, the majority of manufacturers need to establish effective methods for the selection of distribution customers. The method presented in this paper can classify customers into three regions and rank their status to help suppliers effectively make decisions. The three-way decision (3WD) is a well-known fast sorting method in multi-attribute decision-making (MADM). In this paper, we proposed the 3WD model based on Indifference Threshold based Attribute Ratio Analysis (ITARA), ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalite III (ELLECTRE III) in the spherical fuzzy environment. Then, we used the SF-ITARA-ELECTRE III-3WD method to select the suitable customers for dispensing. In addition, comparison with the conventional SF-PROMETHEE-3WD, SF-EVAMIX-3WD, SF-TOPSIS-3WD and SF-VIKOR-3WD are created to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method. An effective risk-averse solution to the MADM problem for spherical fuzzy environment is provided.
YaoY.Y., Three-way decision: an interpretation of rules in rough set theory, International Conference on Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology (2009), 642–649.
2.
HatefiM.A., Indifference threshold-based attribute ratio analysis:A method for assigning the weights to the attributes in multiple attribute decision making, Applied Soft Computing74(2019), 643–651.
3.
RoyB., The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTREmethods, Theory and Decision31 (1991), 49–73.
4.
MahmoodT., KifayatU., KhanQ. and JanN., An approach towarddecision-making and medical diagnosis problems using the concept ofspherical fuzzy sets, Neural Computing and Applications31 (2019), 7041â£″7053.
5.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8(1965), 338–356.
YagerR.R., Pythagorean fuzzy subsets, Proceedings of Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting, Edmonton, Canada (2013), 57–61.
8.
CuongB.C., Picture fuzzy sets, Journal of Computer Science and Cybernetics30 (2015), 409.
9.
YildirimB.F. and Kuzu Yıldırım, Evaluating thesatisfaction level of citizens in municipality services by usingpicture fuzzy VIKOR method: –period analysis, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering5(2022) (2019), 50–66.
10.
DasA.K. and GranadosC., FP-intuitionistic multi fuzzy N-soft setand its induced FP-Hesitant N soft set in decision-making, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering5(2022), 67–89.
11.
RiazM. and Athar FaridH.M., FPicture fuzzy aggregation approachwith application to third-party logistic provider selection process, Reports in Mechanical Engineering5 (2022), 227–236.
12.
AshrafA., UllahK., HussainA. and BariM., Interval-valued picture fuzzy maclaurin symmetric mean operator with application in multiple attribute decision-making, Reports in Mechanical Engineering3 (2022), 210–226.
13.
CaoH.F., ZhangR.T. and WangJ., Some spherical linguistic Muirhead mean operators with their application to multi-attribute decisionmaking, Journal of Intelligence and Fuzzy Systems37(2019) (2019), 8079–8111.
14.
ZengS.Z., MunirM., MahmoodT. and NaeemM., Some T-Spherical fuzzy einstein interactive aggregation operatorsand their application to selection of photovoltaic cells, Mathematical Problems in Engineering2020(2020), 1–16.
15.
LiuP.D., ZhuB.Y., WangP. and ShenM.J., An approach based onlinguistic spherical fuzzy sets for public evaluation of sharedbicycles in China, Engineering Applications of ArtificialIntelligence87 (2020), 103295.
16.
ZižovićM. and PamucarD., New model for determiningcriteria weights: Level Based Weight Assessment (LBWA) model, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering2(2019), 126–137.
17.
PamucarD., StevićŽ. and SremacS., NA new model fordetermining weight coefficients of criteria in MCDM models: Fullconsistency method (FUCOM), Symmetry10 (2018), 393.
18.
Sofuoglu AlperM., Development of an ITARA-based hybridmulti-criteria decision-making model for material selection, Soft Computing23 (2019), 6715–6725.
19.
UlutasA. and KarabaševićD., Development of a Novel Integrated CCSD-ITARA-MARCOS Decision-Making Approach for Stackers Selection in a Logistics System, Mathematics8 (2020), 1672.
20.
LiuP.D., PanQ. and XuH.X., Multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) method based on normal q-rung ortho pairfuzzy environment, Journal of Intelligence AND Fuzzy Systems40 (2021), 9085–9111.
YadavG. and LuthraL., A framework to overcome sustainable supply chain challenges through solution measures of industry 4.0 and circular economy: An automotive case, Journal of Cleaner Production254 (2020), 112–120.
23.
ZhouL.P., WanS.P. and DongJ.Y., A fermatean fuzzy ELECTRE methodfor multi-criteria group decision-making, Informatica33(2022), 181–224.
24.
LiuZ.M., BiY.W., WangX.Y., ShaL.B. and LiuP.D., A generalized TODIM-ELECTRE II method based on linguistic Z-numbers and Dempster–Shafer evidence theory with unknown weight information, Complex AND Intelligent Systems8 (2022), 941–971.
25.
ChenZ.S., ZhangX., RodríguezR.M., PedryczW. and MartínezL., Expertise-based bid evaluation forconstruction-contractor selection with generalized comparativelinguistic ELECTRE III, Automation in Construction125(2021), 103578.
26.
PengH.G., ShenK.W., HeS.S., ZhangH.Y. and WangJ.Q., Investmentrisk evaluation for new energy resources: An integrated decisionsupport model based on regret theory and ELECTRE III, EnergyConversion and Management183 (2019), 332–348.
27.
AkramM., IlyasF. and Al-KenaniA.N., Two-phase group decision-aiding system using ELECTRE III Method in Pythagorean Fuzzy Environment, Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering46 (2021), 3549–3566.
28.
MahmoudiM., AydiA. and IbrahimH., Site selection for artificial recharge with treated wastewater with the integration of multi-criteria evaluation and ELECTRE III, Environmental Science and Pollution Research28 (2021), 46748–46763.
29.
ChenZ.S., ZhangX., RodríguezR.M., et al.Expertise-based bidevaluation for construction-contractor selection with generalizedcomparative linguistic ELECTRE III, Automation in Construction125 (2021), 103578.
30.
PawlakZ., Rough sets, International Journal of Computer ANDInformation Sciences11 (1982), 341–356.
31.
LangG. and MiaoD., Three-way group conflict analysis based on Pythagorean fuzzy set theory, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems28 (2020), 447–461.
32.
LiX., XuZ.S. and WangH., Three-way decisions based on some Hamacher aggregation operators under double hierarchy linguistic environment, International Journal of Intelligent Systems36 (2021), 7731–7753.
33.
WangT., LiH., QianY., HuangB. and ZhouX., A regret-basedthree-way decision model under interval type-2 fuzzy environment, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems30 (2020), 175–189.
34.
SałabunW., Watróbski J. and Shekhovtsov A., re MCDA MethodsBenchmarkable? A Comparative Study of TOPSIS, VIKOR, COPRAS, andPROMETHEE II Methods, Symmetry12 (2020), 1549.
35.
CorazzaM., FunariS. and SivieroF., A murame-based technology forbank decision support in credit worthiness assessment, Banks and Bank Systems9 (2014), 8–18.
