Skip to main content

Advertisement

Selection of data products: a hybrid AFSA-MABAC approach

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

Abstract

With the growing demands of data products, the selection of satellite image data products becomes a challenging decision issue for customers. The objective of this study is to propose a practically sound decision-making approach for solving the satellite image data products selection problems. First, the influencing factors of selecting satellite image data products are identified. Then, hybrid evaluation information is recommended to represent these criteria. That is, numerical and interval-valued quantification is used for quantitative criteria, and picture fuzzy numbers (PFNs) are considered to express qualitative criteria. To reflect decision makers’ preferences, a non-linear optimization is implemented to treat criteria weights with constraints. Thereafter, some penalty functions are defined and the artificial fish swarm algorithm (AFSA) is improved to calculate weight values. Furthermore, six main parameters of AFSA are analyzed. Compared with other commonly used algorithms (such as genetic algorithm (GA) and particle swarm optimization (PSO)), the largest advantage of AFSA is its high robustness of parameters and initial values. Finally, the traditional multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC) is modified with likelihood measures to obtain the best data product in hybrid evaluation environments. Furthermore, the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed approach is validated by comparing with existing methods in some representative literature. The results demonstrate that the proposed method is feasible and can provide useful guidelines for the selection and pricing of satellite image data products.

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

Access this article

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

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

Data availability

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

References

  1. Cuong BC, Kreinovich V (2014) Picture fuzzy sets. J Comput Sci Cybern 30(4):409–420

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wei G, Alsaadi FE, Hayat T, Alsaedi A (2018) Projection models for multiple attribute decision making with picture fuzzy information. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 9(4):713–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhao H, Zhao H, Guo S (2017) Evaluating the comprehensive benefit of eco-industrial parks by employing multi-criteria decision making approach for circular economy. J Clean Prod 142:2262–2276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yue C (2018) Normalized projection approach to group decision-making with hybrid decision information. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 9(8):1365–1375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Luo SZ, Xing LN (2019) A hybrid decision making framework for personnel selection using BWM, MABAC and PROMETHEE. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21(8):2421–2434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Liang WZ, Zhao GY, Hao WU, Ying CHEN (2019) Optimization of mining method in subsea deep gold mines: a case study. Trans Nonferrous Metals Soc China 29(10):2160–2169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yu X, Xu Z, Chen Q (2011) A method based on preference degrees for handling hybrid multiple attribute decision making problems. Expert Syst Appl 38(4):3147–3154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fan ZP, Zhang X, Chen FD, Liu Y (2013) Extended TODIM method for hybrid multiple attribute decision making problems. Knowl-Based Syst 42:40–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wan SP, Dong JY (2015) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy mathematical programming method for hybrid multi-criteria group decision making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy truth degrees. Inf Fusion 26:49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gou X, Xu Z, Liao H (2016) Alternative queuing method for multiple criteria decision making with hybrid fuzzy and ranking information. Inf Sci 357:144–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhang K, Zhan J, Wu WZ (2020) On multi-criteria decision-making method based on a fuzzy rough set model with fuzzy α-neighborhoods. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2020.3001670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhan J, Jiang H, Yao Y (2020) Three-way multi-attribute decision-making based on outranking relations. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2020.3007423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ye J, Zhan J, Ding W, Fujita H (2021) A novel fuzzy rough set model with fuzzy neighborhood operators. Inf Sci 544:266–297

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Neshat M, Sepidnam G, Sargolzaei M, Toosi AN (2014) Artificial fish swarm algorithm: a survey of the state-of-the-art, hybridization, combinatorial and indicative applications. Artif Intell Rev 42(4):965–997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Luo S, Liang W, Zhao G (2020) Likelihood-based hybrid ORESTE method for evaluating the thermal comfort in underground mines. Appl Soft Comput 87:105983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.105983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Luo S, Liang W, Zhao G (2020) Hybrid PSO-WDBA method for the site selection of tailings pond. Comput Ind Eng 143:106429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pamučar D, Ćirović G (2015) The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC). Expert Syst Appl 42(6):3016–3028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang L, Peng JJ, Wang JQ (2018) A multi-criteria decision-making framework for risk ranking of energy performance contracting project under picture fuzzy environment. J Clean Prod 191:105–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liang WZ, Zhao GY, Luo SZ (2018) An integrated EDAS-ELECTRE method with picture fuzzy information for cleaner production evaluation in gold mines. IEEE Access 6:65747–65759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li XL (2002) An optimizing method based on autonomous animats: fish-swarm algorithm. Syst Eng Theory Pract 22(11):32–38

    Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang X, Fan ZP, Chen FD (2014) Risky multiple attribute decision making with regret aversion. J Syst Manag 23(1):111–117

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kaku K (2019) Satellite remote sensing for disaster management support: a holistic and staged approach based on case studies in Sentinel Asia. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 33:417–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Wei G (2018) TODIM method for picture fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. Informatica 29(3):555–566

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

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

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang R, Wang J, Gao H, Wei G (2019) Methods for MADM with picture fuzzy Muirhead mean operators and their application for evaluating the financial investment risk. Symmetry 11(1):6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 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

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang L, Zhang HY, Wang JQ, Wu GF (2020) Picture fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making method to hotel building energy efficiency retrofit project selection. RAIRO-Oper Res 54(1):211–229

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Joshi R (2020) A novel decision-making method using r-norm concept and VIKOR approach under picture fuzzy environment. Expert Syst Appl 147:113228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yue C (2020) Picture fuzzy normalized projection and extended VIKOR approach to software reliability assessment. Appl Soft Comput 88:106056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.106056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Joshi R (2020) A new picture fuzzy information measure based on Tsallis–Havrda–Charvat concept with applications in presaging poll outcome. Comput Appl Math 39(2):1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-020-1106-z

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Lin M, Huang C, Xu Z (2020) MULTIMOORA based MCDM model for site selection of car sharing station under picture fuzzy environment. Sustain Cities Soc 53:101873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ateş F, Akay D (2020) Some picture fuzzy Bonferroni mean operators with their application to multicriteria decision making. Int J Intell Syst 35(4):625–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Luo S, Xing L (2020) Picture fuzzy interaction partitioned heronian aggregation operators for hotel selection. Mathematics 8(1):3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ding XF, Zhang L, Liu HC (2020) Emergency decision making with extended axiomatic design approach under picture fuzzy environment. Expert Syst 37(2):e12482. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhang P, Tao Z, Liu J, Jin F, Zhang J (2020) An ELECTRE TRI-based outranking approach for multi-attribute group decision making with picture fuzzy sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 2020:1–14. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-191540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Parkan C, Wu ML (1999) Decision-making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Comput Ind Eng 36(3):503–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zhang ZR, Huang CQ, Huang HQ, Tang SQ, Dong KS (2018) An optimization method: hummingbirds optimization algorithm. J Syst Eng Electron 29(2):386–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Graduate Research and Innovation Projects of Hunan Province (CX20190045), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61773120). The first author is supported by China Scholarship Council (201903170185).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

SL, WP and LX conceived and worked together to achieve this work, SL wrote the paper, WP revised the paper, and LX made contribution to the case study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lining Xing.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Appendices

Appendix A

See Tables12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.

Table 12 Influence analysis of parameter \(Visual\)
Table 13 Influence analysis of parameter \(Step\)
Table 14 Influence analysis of parameter \(\Im\)
Table 15 Influence analysis of parameter \(f\)
Table 16 Influence analysis of parameter \(x\)
Table 17 Influence analysis of parameter \(try\_number\)

Appendix B

See Table 18.

Table 18 Terminology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, S., Pedrycz, W. & Xing, L. Selection of data products: a hybrid AFSA-MABAC approach. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 13, 1079–1097 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-021-01436-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-021-01436-z

Keywords