Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

A novel multiple attribute decision-making approach for evaluation of emergency management schemes under picture fuzzy environment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Emergency schemes assessment (ESA) is a momentous activity for the country or government to improve emergency management, which can effectively reduce casualties and economic losses as much as possible. The choice of emergency scheme involves many quantitative or qualitative attributes, thus it can be viewed as a complicated multiple attribute decision making (MADM) issue. Whereas the business and unpredictability characteristics of emergency events, the nondeterminacy, ambiguity and impreciseness always arise in ESA. Picture fuzzy set is deemed as an efficacious technique to seize the ambiguity and indeterminacy of preference information. Because the extant picture fuzzy aggregation operators cannot ponder the priority and relevance of attribute in coping with decision issues. Hence, the goal of this essay is to propound an innovative decision algorithm which takes the prioritized relations and correlation of the ascertained attributes into account based upon the generalized picture fuzzy archimedean copula prioritized operators and a novel score function. Firstly, we develope an innovate score function to more reasonable compare the picture fuzzy numbers. Then, by synthesizing the picture fuzzy number, archimedean copula and prioritized operator, we design the picture fuzzy Archimedean copula prioritized weighted averaging operator, picture fuzzy Archimedean copula prioritized weighted geometric operator and their ordered weighted form to fuse picture fuzzy assessment data and study several remarkable properties, particular cases of these operators. Moreover, we design a novel decision methodology on the basis of the proffered generalized operators and score function to resolve MADM problems. Furthermore, we employ it to dispose of the problem of assessing emergency management schemes in a real-life situation, in which the evaluation information provided via specialists in the form of voting. Ultimately, the outstanding superiority and efficiency of the designed method is justified through the aforementioned numerical and detailed comparative analysis.

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
$34.99 /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 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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

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

Data Availability Statement

The data to sustain the application of this investigation are included within the essay.

References

  1. Ju Y, Wang A, You T (2015) Emergency alternative evaluation and selection based on ANP, DEMATEL, and TL-TOPSIS. Nat Hazards 75(2):347–379

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wang L, Wang YM, Martínez L (2017) A group decision method based on prospect theory for emergency situations. Inf Sci 418:119–135

    Google Scholar 

  3. Qi K, Wang Q, Duan Q, Gong L, Sun J, Liew KM, Jiang L (2018) A multi criteria comprehensive evaluation approach for emergency response capacity with interval 2-tuple linguistic information. Appl Soft Comput 72:419–441

    Google Scholar 

  4. Li M, Cao P (2019) Extended TODIM method for multi-attribute risk decision making problems in emergency response. Comput Ind Eng 135:1286–1293

    Google Scholar 

  5. Liu Y, Wang Y, Xu M, Xu G (2019) Emergency alternative evaluation using extended trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy thermodynamic approach with prospect theory. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21(6):1801–1817

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gao J, Xu Z, Ren P, Liao H (2019) An emergency decision making method based on the multiplicative consistency of probabilistic linguistic preference relations. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 10(7):1613–1629

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ding XF, Liu HC (2019) A new approach for emergency decision-making based on zero-sum game with Pythagorean fuzzy uncertain linguistic variables. Int J Intell Syst 34(7):1667–1684

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ding XF, Liu HC, Shi H (2019) A dynamic approach for emergency decision making based on prospect theory with interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic variables. Comput Ind Eng 131:57–65

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen L, Li Z, Deng X (2020) Emergency alternative evaluation under group decision makers: a new method based on entropy weight and DEMATEL. Int J Syst Sci 51(3):570–583

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Li H, Lv L, Li F, Wang L, Xia Q (2020) A novel approach to emergency risk assessment using FMEA with extended MULTIMOORA method under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Int J Intell Comput Cybern 13(1):46–65

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ding XF, Zhang L, Liu HC (2020) Emergency decision making with extended axiomatic design approach under picture fuzzy environment. Expert Syst 37(2):e12482

    Google Scholar 

  12. Liang X, Teng F, Sun Y (2020) Multiple group decision making for selecting emergency alternatives: a novel method based on the LDWPA operator and LD-MABAC. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(8):2945

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ding XF, Zhu LX, Lu MS, Wang Q, Feng YQ (2020) A novel linguistic Z-number QUALIFLEX method and its application to large group emergency decision making. Sci Programm 2020:1631869. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1631869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rong Y, Liu Y, Pei Z (2020) Complex q-rung orthopair fuzzy 2-tuple linguistic Maclaurin symmetric mean operators and its application to emergency program selection. Int J Intell Syst 35(11):1749–1790

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353

    MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Xu Z, Yager RR (2011) Intuitionistic fuzzy Bonferroni means. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern 41(2):568–578

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jiang Q, Jin X, Lee SJ, Yao S (2019) A new similarity/distance measure between intuitionistic fuzzy sets based on the transformed isosceles triangles and its applications to pattern recognition. Expert Syst Appl 116:439–453

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yuan J, Luo X (2019) Approach for multi-attribute decision making based on novel intuitionistic fuzzy entropy and evidential reasoning. Comput Ind Eng 135:643–654

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang C, Chen C, Streimikiene D, Balezentis T (2019) Intuitionistic fuzzy MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria assessment of the energy storage technologies. Appl Soft Comput 79:410–423

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cuong BC, Kreinovich V (2013) Picture fuzzy sets-a new concept for computational intelligence problems. In: Proceedings of 3rd world congress on information and communication technologies (WICT), Hanoi, Vietnam, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/WICT.2013.7113099

  22. Wei G (2017) Picture fuzzy aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(2):713–724

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Garg H (2017) Some picture fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multicriteria decision-making. Arab J Sci Eng 42(12):5275–5290

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Wei G (2018) Picture fuzzy Hamacher aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. Fundamental Informaticae 157(3):271–320

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Jana C, Senapati T, Pal M, Yager RR (2019) Picture fuzzy Dombi aggregation operators: application to MADM process. Appl Soft Comput 74:99–109

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tian C, Peng JJ, Zhang S, Zhang WY, Wang JQ (2019) Weighted picture fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multi-criteria decision-making problems. Comput Ind Eng 137:106037

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wei G (2017) Picture 2-tuple linguistic Bonferroni mean operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19(4):997–1010

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Wei G (2016) Picture fuzzy cross-entropy for multiple attribute decision making problems. J Bus Econ Manag 17(4):491–502

    Google Scholar 

  29. Khan S, Abdullah S, Ashraf S (2019) Picture fuzzy aggregation information based on Einstein operations and their application in decision making. Math Sci 13(3):213–229

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Liu P, Zhang X (2018) A novel picture fuzzy linguistic aggregation operator and its application to group decision-making. Cognit Comput 10(2):242–259

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wang C, Zhou X, Tu H, Tao S (2017) Some geometric aggregation operators based on picture fuzzy sets and their application in multiple attribute decision making. Ital J Pure Appl Math 37:477–492

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Ashraf S, Mahmood T, Abdullah S, Khan Q (2019) Different approaches to multi-criteria group decision making problems for picture fuzzy environment. Bull Braz Math Soc New Ser 50(2):373–397

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Lin M, Huang C, Xu Z (2020) MULTIMOORA based on MCDM model for site selection of car sharing station under picture fuzzy environment. Sustainable cities and society 53:101873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sklar M (1959) Fonctions de repartition an dimensions et leurs marges. Publ Inst Stat Univ Paris 8:229–231

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Jouini MN, Clemen RT (1996) Copula models for aggregating expert opinions. Oper Res 44(3):444–457

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Cherubini U, Luciano E, Vecchiato W (2004) Copula methods in finance. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Nelsen RB (2007) An introduction to copulas. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Tao Z, Han B, Zhou L, Chen H (2018) The novel computational model of unbalanced linguistic variables based on Archimedean Copula. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 26(04):601–631

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Chen T, He SS, Wang JQ, Li L, Luo H (2019) Novel operations for linguistic neutrosophic sets on the basis of Archimedean copulas and co-copulas and their application in multi-criteria decision-making problems. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 37(2):2887–2912

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rong Y, Pei Z, Liu Y (2020) Generalized single-valued neutrosophic power aggregation operators based on Archimedean copula and co-copula and their application to multi-attribute decision-making. IEEE Access 8:35496–35519

    Google Scholar 

  41. Han B, Tao Z, Chen H, Zhou L, Liu J (2020) A new computational model based on Archimedean copula for probabilistic unbalanced linguistic term set and its application to multiple attribute group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 140:106264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yager RR (2008) Prioritized aggregation operators. Int J Approx Reason 48(1):263–274

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Yu X, Xu Z (2013) Prioritized intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. Inf Fus 14(1):108–116

    Google Scholar 

  44. Arora R, Garg H (2019) Group decision-making method based on prioritized linguistic intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators and its fundamental properties. Comput Appl Math 38(2):36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-019-0764-1

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Nancy Garg H (2018) Linguistic single-valued neutrosophic prioritized aggregation operators and their applications to multiple-attribute group decision-making. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 9(6):1975–1997

    Google Scholar 

  46. Qin Y, Qi Q, Shi P, Scott PJ, Jiang X (2020) Linguistic interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy Archimedean prioritised aggregation operators for multi-criteria decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38(4):4643–4666

    Google Scholar 

  47. Tian ZP, Wang J, Zhang HY, Wang JQ (2018) Multi-criteria decision-making based on generalized prioritized aggregation operators under simplified neutrosophic uncertain linguistic environment. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 9(3):523–539

    Google Scholar 

  48. Zhu J, Li Y (2018) Green supplier selection based on consensus process and integrating prioritized operator and Choquet integral. Sustainability 10(8):2744

    Google Scholar 

  49. Han Y, Deng Y, Cao Z, Lin CT (2019) An interval-valued Pythagorean prioritized operator-based game theoretical framework with its applications in multicriteria group decision making. Neural Comput Appl 32:7641–7659

    Google Scholar 

  50. Liu P, Liu W (2020) Multiple-criteria decision making method based on the scaled prioritized operators with unbalanced linguistic information. Artif Intell Rev 53:4967–4991

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wang X, Triantaphyllou E (2008) Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega Int J Manag Sci 36(1):45–63

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lin M, Wang H, Xu Z (2019) TODIM-based multi-criteria decision-making method with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Artif Intell Rev 53:3647–3671

    Google Scholar 

  53. Lin M, Chen Z, Liao H, Xu Z (2019) ELECTRE II method to deal with probabilistic linguistic term sets and its application to edge computing. Nonlinear Dyn 96(3):2125–2143

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Lin M, Wei J, Xu Z, Chen R (2018) Multiattribute group decision-making based on linguistic pythagorean fuzzy interaction partitioned bonferroni mean aggregation operators. Complexity. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9531064

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  55. Lin M, Li X, Chen L (2020) Linguistic q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets and their interactional partitioned Heronian mean aggregation operators. Int J Intell Syst 35(2):217–249

    Google Scholar 

  56. Jiang L, Liao H (2020) Network consensus analysis of probabilistic linguistic preference relations for group decision making and its application in urban household waste classification. J Clean Prod 278:122766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Peng X, Zhang X, Luo Z (2020) Pythagorean fuzzy MCDM method based on CoCoSo and CRITIC with score function for 5G industry evaluation. Artif Intell Rev 53:3813–3847

    Google Scholar 

  58. Tang M, Liao H (2019) From conventional group decision making to large-scale group decision making: what are the challenges and how to meet them in big data era? A state-of-the-art survey. Omega 102141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2019.102141

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61372187, the Scientific and Technological Project of Sichuan Province under Grant 2019YFG0100. the Sichuan Province Youth Science and Technology Innovation Team under Grant 2019JDTD0015, the Application Basic Research Plan Project of Sichuan Province under Grant 2017JY0199, the Scientific Research Project of Department of Education of Sichuan Province under Grant 18ZA0273 and Grant 15TD0027, the Scientific Research Project of Neijiang Normal University under Grant 18TD08, the Application Basic Research of Sichuan Province under Grant 2021JY0108, the Innovation Fund of Postgraduate Xihua University under Grant YCJJ2020028, the University Students Innovation and Entrepreneurship Project of Xihua Cup under Grant 2020107.

The author would like to thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions, which will help us to better improve this paper. The author (Yuan Rong) would like to special thank the radio management technology research center of Xihua University for its great support during the preparation of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science, Xihua University, Chengdu, 610039, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China

    Yuan Rong & Zheng Pei

  2. Data Recovery Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Neijiang Normal University, Neijiang, 641100, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China

    Yi Liu

  3. Numerical Simulation Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Neijiang Normal University, Neijiang, 641100, Sichuan, People’s Republic of China

    Yi Liu

Authors
  1. Yuan Rong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yi Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zheng Pei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zheng Pei.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest about the manuscript “A novel MCDM approach for evaluation of emergency management alternatives under picture fuzzy environment”.

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

Rong, Y., Liu, Y. & Pei, Z. A novel multiple attribute decision-making approach for evaluation of emergency management schemes under picture fuzzy environment. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 13, 633–661 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-021-01280-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-021-01280-1

Keywords