Multi-attribute group decision making (MAGDM) is a flexible and complex problem due to multiple factors. Decision makers have different preferences in the face of different risks and benefits. In this paper, it proposed that the extended single-valued neutrosophic TOPSIS method based on the prospect theory (SVN-PT-TOPSIS) can be widely applied to MAGDM. It provides decision-makers with more rigorous decision-making methods. The purpose is to make the results more objective and fair and to reduce subjective errors. This paper is applied in a single-value neutrosophic sets (SVNSs) environment, which contains membership value, uncertainty value and non-membership value, and can effectively reflect the fuzzy decision state of decision makers. It also combines the CRITIC method to determine the weights and considers the psychological state of decision makers according to the prospect theory, which can effectively reduce the influence of subjective preferences on decision making. The innovations of this paper are mainly as follows. Firstly, after the score function determines the positive and negative ideal values, using the distance formula reflects the distance between each single-value neutrosophic number (SVNN) and the positive and negative ideal values. We will feel the overall quality of each scheme more directly. Secondly determine the weights using the CRITIC method based on the distance matrix of each SVNN from the negative ideal. This is not a subjective decision weight, so the influence of personal preferences on the decision can be avoided. Thirdly, the composite profit value and the composite loss value are confirmed based on the prospect theory (PT), taking into account the decision maker’s risk preferences. Finally, use the relative profit loss ratio to rank the programs. After case analysis, other classical decisionmaking methods are selected for comparative analysis of the extended TOPSIS It is confirmed that the SVN-PT-TOPSIS method is reasonable and effective, which is suitable for MAGDM problems.
BaydasMPamucarD. Determining Objective Characteristics of MCDM Methods under Uncertainty: An Exploration Study with Financial Data. Mathematics.2022; 10(7).
2.
BaydasMElmaOEPamucarD. Exploring the specific capacity of different multi criteria decision making approaches under uncertainty using data from financial markets. Expert Systems with Applications.2022; 197.
3.
da SilvaRFBellinelloMMde SouzaGFMAntomarioniSBevilacquaMCiarapicaFE. Deciding a Multicriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Method to Prioritize Maintenance Work Orders of Hydroelectric Power Plants. Energies.2021; 14(24).
4.
AnyszHNicalAStevicZGrzegorzewskiMSikoraK. Pareto Optimal Decisions in Multi-Criteria Decision Making Explained with Construction Cost Cases. Symmetry-Basel.2021; 13(1).
5.
NingBQWeiGWLinRGuoYF. A novel MADM technique based on extended power generalized Maclaurin symmetric mean operators under probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy setting and its application to sustainable suppliers selection. Expert Systems with Applications.2022; 204.
6.
ZhangYCaiQWeiGWangHWeiC. A Modified EDAS Method Based on Cumulative Prospect Theory for MAGDM with 2-Tuple Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy Information. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.2023.
7.
WeiGLinRLuJWuJWeiC. The Generalized Dice Similarity Measures for Probabilistic Uncertain Linguistic MAGDM and Its Application to Location Planning of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.2022; 24(2): 933-48.
8.
KumarKChenS-M. Multiple attribute group decision making based on advanced linguistic intuitionistic fuzzy weighted averaging aggregation operator of linguistic intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. Information Sciences.2022; 587: 813-24.
9.
DiaoFCaiQWeiG. Taxonomy Method for Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making Under the Spherical Fuzzy Environment. Informatica.2022; 33(4): 713-29.
10.
RongLLWangLLiuPDZhuBY. Evaluation of MOOCs based on multigranular unbalanced hesitant fuzzy linguistic MABAC method. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2021; 36(10): 5670-713.
11.
TangMLiaoHC. Multi-attribute large-scale group decision making with data mining and subgroup leaders: An application to the development of the circular economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.2021; 167.
12.
TianYMiXJJiYPKangBY. Z(E)-numbers: A new extended Z-numbers and its application on multiple attribute group decision making. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence.2021; 101.
13.
XuGLWanSPLiXBFengFX. An integrated method for multiattribute group decision making with probabilistic linguistic term sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2021; 36(11): 6871-912.
14.
YouPLiuXHSunJB. A multi-attribute group decision making method considering both the correlation coefficient and hesitancy degrees under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Applied Soft Computing.2021; 104.
JiangHBZhanJMSunBZAlcantudJCR. An MADM approach to covering-based variable precision fuzzy rough sets: an application to medical diagnosis. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics.2020; 11(9): 2181-207.
17.
KuoRJWangYCTienFC. Integration of artificial neural network and MADA methods for green supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production.2010; 18(12): 1161-70.
18.
LuJPWeiC. TODIM method for performance appraisal on social-integration-based rural reconstruction with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy information. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2019; 37(2): 1731-40.
19.
TorraV. Hesitant Fuzzy Sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2010; 25(6): 529-39.
RodriguezRMMartinezLHerreraF. Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making. Ieee Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.2012; 20(1): 109-19.
22.
CuongBCHaiPV, editors. Some fuzzy logic operators for picture fuzzy sets. Seventh International Conference on Knowledge and Systems Engineering (KSE); 2015 Oct 08-10; Ho Chi Minh City, VIETNAM. NEW YORK: IEEE; 2015.
23.
WeiGWWuJWeiCWangJLuJP. Models for MADM With 2-Tuple Linguistic Neutrosophic Dombi Bonferroni Mean Operators. IEEE Access.2019; 7: 108878-905.
24.
YeJ. Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Method Using Correlation Coefficients of Normal Neutrosophic Sets. Symmetry-Basel.2017; 9(6).
25.
SmarandacheF, editor, Proceedings of the first international conference on neutrosophy, neutrosophic logic, neutrosophic set, neutrosophic probability and statistics – Preface – (An introduction to neutrosophy, neutrosophic logic, neutrosophic set, and neutrosophic probability and statistics). 1st International Conference on Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Logic, Set, Probability and Statistics; 2001 Dec 01-03; Univ New Mexico, Gallup, Nm2001.
26.
WangHBSmarandacheFZhangYQSunderramanR, editors. Single valued neutrosophic sets. 8th Joint Conference on Information Sciences (JCIS 2005); 2005 Jul 21-26; Salt Lake City, UT2005.
27.
WangHBZhangYQSunderramanR, editors. Truth-value based interval neutrosophic sets. IEEE International Conference on Granular Computing; 2005 Jul 25-27; Beijing, PEOPLES R CHINA2005.
28.
PengJJWangJQWuXHWangJChenXH. Multi-valued Neutrosophic Sets and Power Aggregation Operators with Their Applications in Multi-criteria Group Decision-making Problems. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems.2015; 8(2): 345-63.
29.
HuangHL. New Distance Measure of Single-Valued Neutrosophic Sets and Its Application. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2016; 31(10): 1021-32.
30.
FanCXYeJ. The cosine measure of refined-single valued neutrosophic sets and refined-interval neutrosophic sets for multiple attribute decision-making. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2017; 33(4): 2281-9.
31.
YeJ. Single-valued neutrosophic similarity measures based on cotangent function and their application in the fault diagnosis of steam turbine. Soft Computing.2017; 21(3): 817-25.
32.
GaraiTGargHRoyTK. A ranking method based on possibility mean for multi-attribute decision making with single valued neutrosophic numbers. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing.2020; 11(11): 5245-58.
33.
WeiGZhangZ. Some single-valued neutrosophic Bonferroni power aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing.2019; 10(3): 863-82.
34.
WangJLuJWeiGLinRWeiC. Models for MADM with Single-Valued Neutrosophic 2-Tuple Linguistic Muirhead Mean Operators. Mathematics.2019; 7(5).
JinFNiZChenHLangariRZhuXYuanH. Single-valued neutrosophic entropy and similarity measures to solve supplier selection problems. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2018; 35(6): 6513-23.
37.
PengJJWangJQWangJZhangHYChenXH. Simplified neutrosophic sets and their applications in multi-criteria group decision-making problems. International Journal of Systems Science.2016; 47(10): 2342-58.
38.
XuDSWeiXLDingHBinHQ. A New Method Based on PROMETHEE and TODIM for Multi-Attribute Decision-Making with Single-Valued Neutrosophic Sets. Mathematics.2020; 8(10).
39.
BiswasPPramanikSGiriBC. TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Computing & Applications.2016; 27(3): 727-37.
40.
LaiY-JLiuT-YHwangC-L. TOPSIS for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research.1994; 76(3): 486-500.
41.
ShabirMMushtaqRNazM. An algebraic approach to N-soft sets with application in decision-making using TOPSIS. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2021; 41(1): 819-39.
42.
SunYHCaiYL. A Flexible Decision-Making Method for Green Supplier Selection Integrating TOPSIS and GRA Under the Single-Valued Neutrosophic Environment. Ieee Access.2021; 9: 83025-40.
43.
ZengJJLinGSHuangGR. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of Green Infrastructure in climate change scenarios using TOPSIS. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening.2021; 64: 9.
44.
ZhangKDaiJHZhanJM. A new classification and ranking decision method based on three-way decision theory and TOPSIS models. Information Sciences.2021; 568: 54-85.
45.
ZhangQYYangSM. Evaluating the sustainability of big data centers using the analytic network process and fuzzy TOPSIS. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.2021; 28(14): 17913-27.
46.
ZulqarnainRMXinXLSiddiqueIKhanWAYousifMA. TOPSIS Method Based on Correlation Coefficient under Pythagorean Fuzzy Soft Environment and Its Application towards Green Supply Chain Management. Sustainability.2021; 13(4): 25.
47.
WangCYChenSM, editors. A New Multiple Attribute Decision Making Method Based on Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, Linear Programming Methodology, and the TOPSIS Method. 9th International Conference on Advanced Computational Intelligence (ICACI); 2017 Feb 04-06; Doha, QATAR2017.
48.
JiangYPLiangHMSunMH. A method for discrete stochastic MADM problems based on the ideal and nadir solutions. Computers & Industrial Engineering.2015; 87: 114-25.
49.
RadulescuCZRadulescuIC. An Extended TOPSIS Approach for Ranking Cloud Service Providers. Studies in Informatics and Control.2017; 26(2): 183-92.
50.
CaoJLXuFF. Entropy-Based Fuzzy TOPSIS Method for Investment Decision Optimization of Large-Scale Projects. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience.2022; 2022.
51.
SontakkeD, editors. Vendor Evaluation and Ranking system Using TOPSIS for Air Conditioners Manufacturer. International Conference on Nascent Technologies in Engineering (ICNTE); 2017 Jan 27-28; Vashi, INDIA2017.
52.
LiDFRenHP. Multi-attribute decision making method considering the amount and reliability of intuitionistic fuzzy information. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2015; 28(4): 1877-83.
53.
FaiziSSalabunWRashidTZafarSWatrobskiJ. Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets in Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Problems Using the Characteristic Objects Method. Symmetry-Basel.2020; 12(9): 15.
54.
WatrobskiJSalabunW, editors. The Characteristic Objects Method: A New Intelligent Decision Support Tool for Sustainable Manufacturing. 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Design and Manufacturing (SDM); 2016 2016 Apr 04-06; Chania, GREECE2016.
55.
DezertJTchamovaAHanDTacnetJ-M, editors. The SPOTIS Rank Reversal Free Method for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Support. 23rd International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION); 2020 2020 Jul 06-09; Electr Network2020.
56.
WatrobskiJBaczkiewiczAZiembaESalabunW. Sustainable cities and communities assessment using the DARIA-TOPSIS method. Sustainable Cities and Society.2022; 83.
57.
SuYZhaoMWeiGWeiCChenX. An extended MABAC method based on prospect theory for multiple attribute group decision making under probabilistic uncertain linguistic environment. Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems.2022; 19(5): 79-94.
58.
DengJZhanJDingWLiuPPedryczW. A novel prospect-theory-based three-way decision methodology in multi-scale information systems. Artificial Intelligence Review.2022.
59.
LiuPLiuX. A multi-attribute decision-making method based on the third-generation prospect theory and grey correlation degree. Scientia Iranica.2021; 28(2): 1001-13.
60.
GanQChenS. Assessing consumers’ motivations for purchasing remanufactured products Using single valued neutrosophic sets and prospect theory. Kybernetes.2020; 49(9): 2221-40.
61.
MaoQChenJLvJChenS. Emergency plan selection for epidemic prevention and control based on cumulative prospect theory and hybrid-information MADM. Kybernetes.2022.
62.
LiaoNGaoHLinRWeiGChenX. An extended EDAS approach based on cumulative prospect theory for multiple attributes group decision making with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information. Artificial Intelligence Review.2022.
63.
JiangZWeiGWuJChenX. CPT-TODIM method for picture fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making and its application to food enterprise quality credit evaluation. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2021; 40(5): 10115-28.
64.
GaoKSunLYangYMengFQuX. Cumulative prospect theory coupled with multi-attribute decision making for modeling travel behavior. Transportation Research Part a-Policy and Practice.2021; 148: 1-21.
65.
WangJMaXXuZPedryczWZhanJ. A three-way decision method with prospect theory to multi-attribute decision-making and its applications under hesitant fuzzy environments. Applied Soft Computing.2022; 126.
66.
LiuPZhangP. A normal wiggly hesitant fuzzy MABAC method based on CCSD and prospect theory for multiple attribute decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems.2021; 36(1): 447-77.
67.
SuYZhaoMWeiGWeiCChenX. Probabilistic uncertain linguistic EDAS method based on prospect theory for multiple attribute group decision-making and its application to green finance. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.2022; 24(3): 1318-31.
68.
SuYZhaoMWWeiCChenXD. PT-TODIM Method for Probabilistic Linguistic MAGDM and Application to Industrial Control System Security Supplier Selection. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems.2022; 24(1): 202-15.
69.
TverskyAKahnemanD. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.1992; 5(4): 297-323.
SalabunWUrbaniakK, editors. A New Coefficient of Rankings Similarity in Decision-Making Problems. 20th Annual International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS); 2020 Jun 03-05; Amsterdam, NETHERLANDS. CHAM: Springer International Publishing Ag; 2020.
