Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

A new intuitionistic fuzzy best worst method for deriving weight vector of criteria and its application

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Intuitionistic fuzzy Best Worst method (IFBWM) is an effective method to deal with multi-criteria decision making problems via intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons of experts, which has attracted increasing attention from different decision fields. However, there are drawbacks in the existing IFBWMs, which can result in unreasoning and incorrect ranking order of criteria or alternatives. To overcome the existing drawbacks of the IFBWMs, we propose a new IFBWM considering the multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons. First, combining the multiplicative consistent intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation with the fully multiplicative consistency of the intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons, we build the mathematical programming model for obtaining the normalized intuitionistic fuzzy weight vector. Then, we define the concept of the consistency ratio for evaluating the multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons. Afterwards, an algorithm for repairing the inconsistency of intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons is developed, which only adjust the preference degree of the best criterion over the worst criterion. Subsequently we propose a new IFBWM with the multiplicative consistency. Furthermore, we apply the proposed method to Advanced Mathematics textbooks selection. The computational results show that the consistency ratio is 0.0091, implying the intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons are acceptable, and the ranking order of the alternatives\(C_{1} \succ C_{2} \succ C_{4} \succ C_{3}\) is consistent with the initial judgment of experts and the actual usage of Advanced Mathematics textbooks in universities of China. The computational results of the practical example through the other methods reveal that there are some troubles in the consistency ratio, the weights of alternatives or the ranking order of the alternative. Therefore, the results suggest that the proposed method may have significant effects on the theoretical development and practical application of IFBWM.

This is a preview of subscription content,log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Ali A, Rashid T (2019) Hesitant fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Int J Intell Syst 34(8):1953–1967

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali A, Rashid T (2020) Generalized interval-valued trapezoidal fuzzy best-worst multiple criteria decision-making method with applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38:1705–1719

    Google Scholar 

  • Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dong JY, Wan SP, Chen SM (2021) Fuzzy best-worst method based on triangular fuzzy numbers for multi- criteria decision-making. Inf Sci 547:1080–1104

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Faizi S, Sałabun W, Nawaz S, Rehman A, Wątrobski J (2021) Best-Worst method and Hamacher aggregation operations for intuitionistic 2-tuple linguistic sets. Expert Syst Appl 181:115088

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng XQ, Pang XD, Wei CP (2020) Distance-based consistency measure and priority weights of Best-Worst multi-criteria decision making method. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 28(5):853–878

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Genç S, Boran FE, Akay D, Xu ZS (2010) Interval multiplicative transitivity for consistency, missing values and priority weights of interval fuzzy preference relations. Inf Sci 180(24):4877–4891

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gong ZW, Li LS, Forrest J, Zhao Y (2011) The optimal priority models of the intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation and their application in selecting industries with higher meteorological sensitivity. Expert Syst Appl 38(4):4394–4402

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo S, Zhao HR (2017) Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowl -Based Syst 121(5):23–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasan MdG, Ashraf Z, Khan MF (2022) Multi-choice best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Int J Intell Syst 37(2):1129–1156

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishizaka A, Resce G (2021) Best-Worst PROMETHEE method for evaluating school performance in the OECD’s PISA project. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 73:100799

    Google Scholar 

  • Karimi H, Dastaki MS, Javan M (2020) A fully fuzzy best-worst multi attribute decision making with triangular fuzzy numbers: a case study of maintenance assessment in the hospitals. App Soft Comput 86:105882

    Google Scholar 

  • Khameneh AZ, Kilicman A, Khameneh HZ, Alcantud JCR (2022) Consistency of total fuzzy relations: new algorithms to detect and repair inconsistent judgments. Expert Syst Appl 209:118234

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanmohammadi E, Zandieh M, Tayebi T (2019) Drawing a strategy canvas using the fuzzy best-worst method. Glob J Flex Syst Manag 20(1):57–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Kheybari S, Ishizaka A (2022) The behavioural best-worst method. Expert Syst Appl 209:118265

    Google Scholar 

  • Laarhoven PM, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(13):199–227

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Labella A, Dutta B, Martínez L (2021) An optimal Best-Worst prioritization method under a 2-tuple linguistic environment in decision making. Comput Ind Eng 155:107141

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Wang JQ, Hu JH (2019) Multi-criteria decision-making method based on dominance degree and BWM with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information. Int J Mach Learn Cyber 10(7):1671–1685

    Google Scholar 

  • Li J, Niu LL, Chen QX, Wang ZX (2021) Approaches for multicriteria decision-making based on the hesitant fuzzy best-worst method. Complex Intell Syst 7(5):2617–2634

    Google Scholar 

  • Li T, Zhang LY, Yang ZY (2020) Multi-criteria group decision making based on the multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation. Eng Lett 28(2):290–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang FQ, Brunelli M, Rezaei J (2020) Consistency issues in the best worst method: measurements and thresholds. Omega 96:102175

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang FQ, Brunelli M, Septian K, Rezaei J (2021) Belief-based best worst method. Int J Inf Technol Decis Making 20(1):287–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang YY, Ju YB, Tu Y, Rezaei J (2022) Nonadditive best-worst method: incorporating criteria interaction using the Choquet integral, J. Res. Soc, Oper.https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2022.2096504

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liao HC, Xu ZS (2014) Priorities of intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation based on multiplicative consistency. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22(6):1669–1681

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu F, Zhang WG, Fu JH (2012) A new method of obtaining the priority weights from an interval fuzzy preference relation. Inf Sci 185(1):32–42

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maleki N, Gholamian MR, Yaghoubi S (2022) An integrated model of BWM and Choquet integral for determining fuzzy measures in interacting criteria. Int J Inf Technol Decis Making 21(3):1061–1086

    Google Scholar 

  • Masamichi S (1973) Fuzzy sets concept in rank-ordering objects. J Math Anal Appl 43(3):717–733

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mi XM, Liao HC (2019) An integrated approach to multiple criteria decision making based on the average solution and normalized weights of criteria deduced by the hesitant fuzzy best worst method. Comput Ind Eng 133:83–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Mi XM, Tang M, Liao HC (2019) The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: why, what, what for and what’s next? Omega 87:205–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi M, Rezaei J (2020) Bayesian best-worst method: a probabilistic group decision making model. Omega 96:1002075

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohtashami A (2021) A novel modified fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Expert Syst Appl 181(14):115196

    Google Scholar 

  • Mou Q, Xu ZS (2017) A method for deriving criteria weights based on graph and intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. J Syst Sci Math Scis 37(4):1049–1062

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Mou Q, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2016) An intuitionistic fuzzy multiplicative best-worst method for multi-criteria group decision making. Inf Sci 374:224–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Mou Q, Xu ZS, Liao HC (2017) A graph based group decision making approach with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Comput Ind Eng 110:138–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishizawa K (1995) A consistency improving method in binary AHP. J Oper Res Soc Jpn 38(1):21–33

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Norouzi A, Hajiagha HR (2021) An interval type-2 hesitant fuzzy best-worst method. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 40:11625–11652

    Google Scholar 

  • Oztaysi B, Onar SC, Goztepe K, Kahraman C (2017) Evaluation of research proposals for grant funding using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Soft Comput 21:1203–1218

    Google Scholar 

  • Ren L, Zhu B, Xu ZS (2019) Data-driven fuzzy preference analysis form an optimization. Fuzzy Sets Syst 377:85–101

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53:49–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2016) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: some properties and a linear model. Omega 64:126–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaie J (2020) A concentration ratio for nonlinear best worst method. Int J Inf Technol Decis Making 19(3):891–907

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill Company, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Safarzadeh S, Khansefid S, M. RAsti-Barzoki (2018) A group multi-criteria decision-making based on best-worst method. Comput Ind Eng 126:111–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Su YH (2019) Experience and inspiration on construction of classic textbooks: examples of Advanced Mathematics compiled by Department of Mathematics in Tongji University, published by Higher Education Press, and Modern Chinese complied by Liao Huang. Chn Publishing J 23:10–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesuzo T (1984) Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 12(2):117–131

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wan SP, Dong JY (2022) A novel extension of best-worst method with intuitionistic fuzzy reference comparisons. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 30(6):1698–1711

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan SP, Wang F, Dong JY (2017) Additive consistent interval-valued Atanassov intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation and likelihood comparison algorithm based group decision making. Eur J Oper Res 263(2):571–582

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wan SP, Dong JY, Chen SM (2021) Fuzzy best-worst method based on generalized interval-valued trapezoidal fuzzy numbers for multi-criteria decision-making. Inf Sci 573:493–518

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wang ZJ (2013) Derivation of intuitionistic fuzzy weights based on intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Appl Math Model 37(9):6377–6388

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wang ZJ (2018) A goal programming approach to deriving interval weights in analytic form from interval fuzzy preference relations based on multiplicative consistency. Inf Sci 462:160–181

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wei CP (2006) An algorithm of measuring the ordinal consistency of a judgement matrix. Or Trans 10(1):116–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Chiclana F (2012) Non-dominance and attitudinal prioritisation methods for intuitionistic and interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Expert Syst Appl 39(18):13409–13416

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Chiclana F, Liao HC (2018) Isomorphic multiplicative transitivity for intuitionistic and interval-valued fuzzy preference relations and its application in deriving their priority vectors. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(1):193–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu ZS (2007) Intuitionistic preference relations and their application in group decision making. Inf Sci 117(11):2363–2379

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xu ZS, Cai XQ (2009) Incomplete interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Int J General Syst 38(8):871–886

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xu ZS, Yager RR (2009) Intuitionistic and interval-valued intutionistic fuzzy preference relations and their measures of similarity for the evaluation of agreement within a group. Fuzzy Optim Decis Making 8:123–139

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xu YJ, Patnayakuni R, Wang HM (2013) The ordinal consistency of a fuzzy preference relation. Inf Sci 224:152–164

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Xu GL, Wan SP, Wang F, Zeng YF (2016) Mathematical programming methods for consistency and consensus in group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations. Knowl Based Syst 98:30–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu YJ, Wang QQ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2018) Methods to improve the ordinal and multiplicative consistency for reciprocal preference relations. Appl Soft Comput 67:479–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang XM, Xu ZS (2012) A new method for ranking intuitionistic fuzzy values and its application in multi- attribute decision making. Fuzzy Optim Decis Making 12:135–146

    MathSciNet MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou TT, Chen ZH, Ming XG (2022) A novel hesitant fuzzy linguistic hybrid cloud model and extended best-worst method for multicriteria decision making. Int J Intell Syst 37:596–624

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions that have helped to significantly improve the quality of this paper. The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11501525), and the Science and Technological Research of Key Projects of Henan Province (222102110404).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mathematics, Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, Zhengzhou, 450046, Henan, China

    Weifeng Liu, Yingxue Du & Juan Chang

Authors
  1. Weifeng Liu

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yingxue Du

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan Chang

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toWeifeng Liu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Advertisement

[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2025 Movatter.jp