Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A complete ranking of trapezoidal-valued intuitionistic fuzzy number: an application in evaluating social sustainability

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conventional trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (CTrIFNs) are used in the literature to handle many real-life problems with imprecise information. However, the CTrIFNs are not the real generalization of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (IVIFNs) and triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (TIFNs). This study discusses the non-conventional trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy numbers called trapezoidal-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (TrVIFNs) that generalize (contain) all real-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers, IVIFNs and TIFNs. Various researchers worldwide are looking for a complete ranking principle on the set of TrVIFNs. However, none of them yields a complete ranking. The paper’s main aim is to propose a new complete ranking principle on the class of TrVIFNs. The complete ranking principle on the set of TrVIFNs makes the decision-making algorithm more robust. To achieve the main aim, firstly, we introduce eight different score functions on the set of TrVIFNs and study their mathematical properties. Secondly, we present a new ranking principle by considering all eight score functions in a linear order. Further, we prove (mathematically) that the introduced ranking principle defines complete ranking on the set of TrVIFNs. Thirdly, we show the significance of the proposed method compared with the existing methods on various classes of fuzzy and intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. Finally, we implement a case application of the proposed complete ranking principle for evaluating the social sustainability performance of Indian firms.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article.

References

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Atanassov KT (1994) Operators over interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 64(2):159–174

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Atanassov KT, Gargov G (1989) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 31(3):343–349

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen SM, Tan JM (1994) Handling multi-criteria fuzzy decision-making problems based on vague set theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 67:163–172

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Dejian Yu, Yingyu W, Ting L (2012) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy prioritized operators and their application in group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 30:57–66

    Google Scholar 

  6. Li D-F (2010) A ratio ranking method of triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and its application to MADM problems. Comput Math Appl 60:1557–1570

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Geetha S, Vishnukumar P, EdwinAntonyRaj M (2020) MCDM based on new membership and non-membership accuracy functions on trapezoidal-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. Soft Comput 24:4283–4293

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Gong R, Ma LY (2019) A new score function and accuracy function of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy number and its application. Syst Eng Theor Pract 39(2):463–475

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hammer J, Pivo G (2017) The triple bottom line and sustainable economic development theory and practice. Econ Dev Q 31(1):25–36

    Google Scholar 

  10. Heinzelmann N (2018) Deontology defended. Synthese 195(12):5197–5216

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hennig M, Hutter M (2020) Revisiting the divide between deontology and utilitarianism in moral dilemma judgment: a multinomial modeling approach. J Pers Soc Psychol 118(1):22

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hong DH, Choi CH (2000) Multi-criteria fuzzy decision-making problems based on vague set theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114:103–113

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Hussain N, Rigoni U, Orij RP (2018) Corporate governance and sustainability performance: Analysis of triple bottom line performance. J Bus Ethics 149(2):411–432

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ishmat B, Rashid T (2014) Multi-criteria trapezoidal valued intuitionistic fuzzy decision making with Choquet integral based TOPSIS. Opsearch 51(1):98–129

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Jain R (1977) A procedure for multi-aspect decision making using fuzzy sets. Int J Syst Sci 8:1–7

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Ye J (2009) Multi-criteria fuzzy decision making method based on a novel accuracy score function under interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Expert Syst Appl 36:6899–6902

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jeevaraj S (2021) Similarity measure on interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers based on non-hesitance score and its application to pattern recognition. Comput Appl Math 39(3):1–15

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Klir GJ, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic: theory and applications. Prentice Hall, Hoboken

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam V, Sivaraman G (2011) Ranking of interval valued intutionistic fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput 11(4):3368–3372

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam V, Jeevaraj S, Sivaraman G (2017) Ranking of incomplete trapezoidal information. Soft Comput 21(23):7125–7140

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam V, Jeevaraj S, Sivaraman G (2016) Total ordering defined on the set of all intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30(4):2015–2028

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Lin LG, Xu LZ, Wang JY (2005) Multi-criteria fusion decision-making method based on vague set. Comput Eng 31:11–13 ((in Chinese))

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lin L, Yuan XH, Xia ZQ (2007) Multicriteria fuzzy decision-making methods based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. J Comput Syst Sci 73:84–88

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Liu HW (2004) Vague set methods of multi-criteria fuzzy decision making. Syst Eng Theory Pract 24:103–109 ((in Chinese))

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mani V, Gunasekaran A, Delgado C (2018) Enhancing supply chain performance through supplier social sustainability: an emerging economy perspective. Int J Prod Econ 195:259–272

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mihailov E (2016) Is deontology a moral confabulation? Neuroethics 9(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  27. Missimer M, Robèrt KH, Broman G (2017) A strategic approach to social sustainability-Part 1: exploring the social system. J Clean Prod 140:32–41

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pope J, Bond A, Huge J, Morrison-Saunders A (2017) Reconceptualising sustainability assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 62:205–215

    Google Scholar 

  29. Quintelier K, Van Speybroeck L, Braeckman J (2011) Normative ethics does not need a foundation: it needs more science. Acta Biotheor 59(1):29–51

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rajesh R, Rajeev A, Rajendran C (2022) Corporate social performances of firms in select developed economies: a comparative study. Socioecon Plann Sci 81:101194

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sachin N, Rajesh R (2022) An empirical study of supply chain sustainability with financial performances of Indian firms. Environ Dev Sustain 24(5):6577–6601

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sacco DF, Brown M, Lustgraaf CJ, Hugenberg K (2017) The adaptive utility of deontology: deontological moral decision-making fosters perceptions of trust and likeability. Evol Psychol Sci 3(2):125–132

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sandberg J (2015) Moral economy and normative ethics. J Global Ethics 11(2):176–187

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomson Reuters ESG Scores (2019) https://www.refinitiv.com/content/dam/marketing/en_us/documents/methodology/esg-scores-methodology.pdf

  35. Wang J, Zhang J, Liu SY (2006) A new score function for fuzzy MCDM based on vague set theory. Int J Comput Cogn 4:44–48

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wang JQ, Zhang Z (2009) Multi-criteria decision making method with incomplete certain information based on intuitionistic fuzzy number. Control Decis 24:226–230 ((in Chinese))

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Xu ZS (2007) Methods for aggregating interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy information and their application to decision making. Control Decis 22(2):215–219

    Google Scholar 

  38. Xu ZS, Chen J (2007) An approach to group decision making based on intervalvalued intuitionistic fuzzy judgement matrices. Syst Eng Theory Pract 27(4):126–133

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Ye J (2010) Using an improved measure function of vague sets for multicriteria fuzzy decision-making. Expert Syst Appl 37:4706–4709

    Google Scholar 

  40. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–356

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang H, Yu L (2012) MADM method based on cross-entropy and extended TOPSIS with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Knowl Based Syst 30:115–120

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zhou Z, Wu QZ (2005) Multicriteria fuzzy decision making method based on vague set. Mini-Micro Syst 26:1350–1353 ((in Chinese))

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors thank the anonymous referees, associate editor and editor-in-chief for their valuable suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Sciences (Mathematics), Atal Bihari Vajpayee Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India, 474015

    S. Jeevaraj

  2. Department of Management Studies (DoMS), Atal Bihari Vajpayee Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India, 474015

    R. Rajesh

  3. Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu, India, 620015

    V. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam

Authors
  1. S. Jeevaraj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Rajesh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Jeevaraj.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors do not have any conflict of interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jeevaraj, S., Rajesh, R. & Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam, V. A complete ranking of trapezoidal-valued intuitionistic fuzzy number: an application in evaluating social sustainability. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 5939–5962 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07983-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07983-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation