Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Green supplier selection based on probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets: A process integrating best worst method and superiority and inferiority ranking

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

China’s equipment manufacturing industry is increasingly important due to the development of economic globalization. Selecting the proper suppliers, taking into consideration the economic and environmental benefits, is strategic due to its impacts on the operation and competitiveness of an enterprise. Uncertainty in the selection of suppliers creates challenges for managers. The probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets (PDHFSs) are powerful and effective tools to handle uncertain information, which integrate the strengths of both the dual hesitant fuzzy sets and probabilistic hesitant fuzzy sets. Considering that the best worst method (BWM) is an efficient weight-determination method, which can simplify the calculation process and improve the consistency degree of the results. The superiority and inferiority ranking (SIR) integrates the strengths of most multi-criteria decision making methods in handling unquantifiable, cardinal and ordinal data. In this paper, we developed an integrated group BWM and SIR to help managers select the optimum suppliers in which the evaluation is expressed in PDHFSs. In this multi-criteria group decision making (MCGDM) problem, the BWM with PDHFSs is investigated to obtain the weights of experts and criteria. A consistency reaching method based on the input-based consistency ratio is proposed to overcome the barrier of the low consistencyrelied on the pairwise comparison and reduce the computation complexity. Furthermore, with the weights of criteria and experts acquired by the PDHFS-BWM, the SIR is extended to the probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy information environment. A numerical example is given to verify the validity and feasibility of the proposed method, and comparison are conducted to show its advantage.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alcantud JCR, Santos-Garcia G, Peng X, Zhan J (2019) Dual extended hesitant fuzzy sets. Symmetry 11(5):714

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bai CG, Satir A (2020) Barriers for green supplier development programs in manufacturing industry. Resour Conserv Recycl 158(104):756

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brans JP, Vincke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24(2):228–238

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang B, Chang CW, Wu CH (2011) Fuzzy DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Expert Syst Appl 38(3):1850–1858

  5. Dutta P, Jaikumar B, Arora MS (2021) Applications of data envelopment analysis in supplier selection between 2000 and 2020: a literature review. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-03931-6

  6. Garg H, Kaur G (2020) Quantifying gesture information in brain hemorrhage patients using probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets with unknown probability information. Comput Ind Eng 140(106):211

    Google Scholar 

  7. Garg H, Kaur G (2020) A robust correlation coefficient for probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets and its applications. Neural Comput Appl 32(4):8846–8866

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gupta H, Barua MK (2018) A framework to overcome barriers to green innovation in SMEs using BWM and Fuzzy TOPSIS. Sci Total Environ 633:122–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hafezalkotob A, Hafezalkotob A, Liao HC, Herrera F (2019) Interval MULTIMOORA method integrating interval borda rule and interval best-worst-method-based weighting model: Case study on hybrid vehicle engine selection. IEEE Trans Cybern 50(3):1157–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hao ZN, Xu ZS, Zhao H, Su Z (2017) Probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy set and its application in risk evaluation. Knowl-Based Syst 127:16–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hendiani S, Liao HC, Ren RX, Lev B (2020) A likelihood-based multi-criteria sustainable supplier selection approach with complex preference information. Inf Sci 536:135–155

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Herrera Viedma E, Martinez L, Mata F, Chiclana F (2005) A consensus support system model for group decision-making problems with multigranular linguistic preference relations. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 13 (5):644–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ho W, Xu XW, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202(1):16–24

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Jian J, Zhan N, Su JF (2019) A novel superiority and inferiority ranking method for engineering investment selection under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 37:6645–6653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jin F, Garg H, Pei L, Liu J, Chen H (2020) Multiplicative consistency adjustment model and data envelopment analysis-driven decision-making process with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy preference relations. Int J Fuzzy Syst 22(7):2319–2332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kaya R, Yet B (2019) Building bayesian networks based on DEMATEL for multiple criteria decision problems: a supplier selection case study. Expert Syst Appl 134:234–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kilic HS, Yalcin AS (2020) Modified two-phase fuzzy goal programming integrated with IF-TOPSIS for green supplier selection. Appl Soft Comput 93(106):371

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kumar A, Aswin A, Gupta H (2020) Evaluating green performance of the airports using hybrid BWM and VIKOR methodology. Tourism Manag 76(103):941

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lahri V (2021) Sustainable supply chain network design problem: using the integrated BWM, TOPSIS, possibilistic programming, and e-constrained methods. Expert Syst Appl 168(114):373

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lai H, Liao H (2021) A multi-criteria decision making method based on DNMA and CRITIC with linguistic D numbers for blockchain platform evaluation. Eng Appl Artif Intell 101(104):200

    Google Scholar 

  22. 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 Cybern 10:1671–1685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Liang FQ, Brunelli M, Rezaei J (2020) Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds. Omega 96(102):175

    Google Scholar 

  24. Liao HC, Mi XM, Yu Q, Luo L (2019) Hospital performance evaluation by a hesitant fuzzy linguistic best worst method with inconsistency repairing. J Clean Prod 232:657–671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liao HC, Si GS, Xu ZS, Fujita H (2018) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference utility set and its application in selection of fire rescue plans. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(4):664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liao HC, Xu ZS (2013) A VIKOR-based method for hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. Fuzzy Optim Decis Making 12(4):373–392

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Lin MW, Chen ZY, Chen RQ, Fujita H (2021) Evaluation of startup companies using multicriteria decision making based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic information envelopment analysis models. Int J Intell Syst 36(5):2292–2322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Liu PD, Zhang P (2021) A normal wiggly hesitant fuzzy MABAC method based on CCSD and prospect theory for multiple attribute decision making. Int J Intell Syst 36:447–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lu N, Liang L (2017) Correlation coefficients of extended hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications to decision making. Symmetry 9(4):47

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Ma ZJ, Zhang N, Dai Y (2014) A novel SIR method for multiple attributes group decision making problem under hesitant fuzzy environment. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(5):2119–2130

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Pei LD, Jin FF, Langari R, Garg H (2021) Local adjustment strategy-driven probabilistic linguistic group decision-making method and its application for fog-haze influence factors evaluation. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 40(3):4135–4154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Qin JD, Liu XW, Pedrycz W (2017) An extended TODIM multi-criteria group decision making method for green supplier selection in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Eur J Oper Res 258(2):626–638

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Ren ZL, Xu ZS, Wang H (2017) An extended TODIM method under probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy information and its application on enterprise strategic assessment. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM). IEEE, pp 1464–1468

  37. Ren ZL, Xu ZS, Wang H (2018) Multi-criteria group decision-making based on quasi-order for dual hesitant fuzzy sets and professional degrees of decision makers. Appl Soft Comput 71:20–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ren ZL, Xu ZS, Wang H (2018) Normal wiggly hesitant fuzzy sets and their application to environmental quality evaluation. Knowl-Based Syst 159:286–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ren ZL, Xu ZS, Wang H (2019) The strategy selection problem on artificial intelligence with an integrated VIKOR and AHP method under probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy information. IEEE Access 7:103,979–103,999

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Rouhani S (2017) A fuzzy superiority and inferiority ranking based approach for IT service management software selection. Kybernetes 46(4):728–746

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Tang J, Zhang Y, Fujita H, Zhang X, Meng F (2021) Analysis of acceptable additive consistency and consensus of group decision making with interval-valued hesitant fuzzy preference relations, Neural Comput Appl, 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05516-z

  45. Tian XL, Xu ZS, Fujita H (2018) Sequential funding the venture project or not? a prospect consensus process with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy preference information. Knowl-Based Syst 161:172–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(6):529–539

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Xu XZ (2001) The SIR, method: a superiority and inferiority ranking method for multiple criteria decision making. Eur J Oper Res 131(3):587–602

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhao N, Xu ZS, Ren ZL (2019) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic prioritized superiority and inferiority ranking method and its application in sustainable energy technology evaluation. Inf Sci 478:239–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhou XY, Wang L, Liao HC, Wang SY, Lev B, Fujita H (2019) A prospect theory-based group decision approach considering consensus for portfolio selection with hesitant fuzzy information. Knowl-Based Syst 168:28–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhu B, Xu ZS (2014) Some results for dual hesitant fuzzy sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26 (4):1657–1668

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhu B, Xu ZS (2016) Extended hesitant fuzzy sets. Technol Econ Dev Econ 22(1):100–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhu B, Xu ZS (2018) Probability-hesitant fuzzy sets and the representation of preference relations. Technol Econ Dev Econ 24(3):1029–1040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Zhu B, Xu ZS, Xia MM (2012) Dual hesitant fuzzy sets. Journal of Applied Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/879629

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71771155, 71971119).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics and Management, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211189, China

    Xiaoyu Wang & Zeshui Xu

  2. School of Information Engineering, Nanjing Audit University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 211815, China

    Hai Wang

  3. School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong Technology and Business University, Yantai, 264005, China

    Zhiliang Ren

Authors
  1. Xiaoyu Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hai Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zeshui Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhiliang Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeshui Xu.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, X., Wang, H., Xu, Z. et al. Green supplier selection based on probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets: A process integrating best worst method and superiority and inferiority ranking. Appl Intell 52, 8279–8301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02821-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02821-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation