Skip to main content
Log in

Design concept evaluation using soft sets based on acceptable and satisfactory levels: an integrated TOPSIS and Shannon entropy

  • Methodologies and Application
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Among several phases of new product development, concept selection is the most crucial activity and it gives perfection to further progress of a product. Customer’s ideas and linguistic requirements are often substantial in concept specifications to assess quantitative criteria, which gives satisfaction for a product to progress in the markets. This work aggregates concept selection on design parameters values by merging acceptable- and satisfactory-level needs of the customers. A promising framework is developed based on soft sets, TOPSIS and the Shannon entropy. Customer’s preferences on incorporating design values are identified based on acceptable- and satisfactory-level needs, and these preferences are weighted through Shannon entropy. By performing AND operation on the soft set of level requirements of one customer with the soft set of requirements of another customer, several weighted tables of soft sets are obtained on the pair of design parameters values. To obtain the best concept on different levels of requirements, TOPSIS is performed which provides several integrated evaluations. An illustration is considered for the demonstration of the method, brings the best concept for two customers which is acceptable for both of the customers, satisfactory for both the customers and vise-versa. Finally, the comparisons are presented with recent major existing methods.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akram M, Nawaz S (2015) Operation on soft graph. Fuzzy Inf Eng 7:423–449

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ali MI, Feng F, Liu X, Min WK, Shabir M (2009) On some new operations in soft set theory. Comput Math Appl 57:1547–1553

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ali MI, Mahmood T, Rehman MMU, Aslam MF (2015) On lattice ordered soft sets. Appl Soft Comput 36:499–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali MI, Shabir M, Feng F (2017) Representation of graphs based on neighborhoods and soft sets. Int J Mach Learn Cyber 8:1525–1535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcantud JCR (2016) A novel algorithm for fuzzy soft set based decision making from multiobserver input parameter data set. Inf Fusion 29:142–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcantud JCR, Mathew TJ (2017) Separable fuzzy soft sets and decision making with positive and negative attributes. Appl Soft Comput 59:586–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcantud JCR, Santos-García G, Hernández-Galilea E (2015) Glaucoma diagnosis: a soft set based decision making procedure. In: Puerta J et al (eds) Advances in artificial intelligence, vol 9422. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, pp 49–60

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Andreasen MM, Olesen J (1990) The concept of dispositions. J Eng Des 1:17–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annacchino M (2003) New product development: from initial idea to product management. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayag Z (2005a) A fuzzy AHP-based simulation approach to concept evaluation in a NPD environment. IIE Trans 37:827–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayag Z (2005b) An integrated approach to evaluating conceptual design alternatives in a new product development environment. Int J Prod Res 43:687–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayag Z (2014) An integrated approach to concept evaluation in a new product development. J Intell Manuf 27:991–1005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cagman N, Enginoglu S (2010) Soft set theory and uni-int decision making. Eur J Oper Res 207:848–855

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chan SL, Ip WH (2011) A dynamic decision support system to predict the value of customer for new product development. Decis Support Syst 52:178–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin KS, Tang DW, Yang JB, Wong SY, Wang H (2009) Assessing new product development project risk by Bayesian network with a systematic probability generation methodology. Expert Syst Appl 36:9879–9890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Comesana-Campos A, Cerqueiro-Pequeno J, Bouza-Rodriguez JB (2018) The Value Index as a decision support tool applied to a new system for evaluating and selecting design alternatives. Expert Syst Appl 113:278–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper R, Edgett S (2008) Maximizing productivity in product innovation. Res Technol Manag 51:47–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs C, Schreier M (2011) Customer empowerment in new product development. J Prod Innov Manag 28:17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geng X, Chu X, Zhang Z (2010) A new integrated design concept evaluation approach based on vague sets. Expert Syst Appl 37:6629–6638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong K, Xiao Z, Zhang X (2010) The bijective soft set with its operations. Comput Math Appl 60:2270–2278

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan N, Sayed OR, Khalil AM, Ghany MA (2017) Fuzzy soft expert system in prediction of coronary artery disease. Int J Fuzzy Syst 19:1546–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayat K, Ali MI, Cao BY, Yang XP (2017) A new type-2 soft set: type-2 soft graphs and their applications. Adv Fuzzy Syst 6162753:1–18

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hayat K, Ali MI, Cao BY, Karaaslan F, Qin Z (2018a) Characterizations of certain types of type-2 soft graphs. Discret Dyn Nat Soc ID: 8535703

  • Hayat K, Ali MI, Alcantud JCR, Cao BY, Tariq KU (2018b) Best concept selection in design process: an application of generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 35:5707–5720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayat K, Ali MI, Cao BY, Karaaslan F, Yang XP (2018c) Another view of aggregation operators on group-based generalized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets: multi-attribute decision making methods. Symmetry 10:753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemetsberger A, Godula G (2007) Integrating expert customers in new product development in industrial business-virtual routes to success. Innov Market 3:28

    Google Scholar 

  • Herawan T, Deris MM (2011) A soft set approach for association rules mining. Knowl Based Syst 24:186–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyer WD, Chandy R, Dorotic M, Krafft M, Singh SS (2010) Consumer cocreation in new product development. J Serv Res 13:283–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making, vol 186. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems. Springer, Berlin

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang S, Jing L, Peng X, Chai H, Li J (2018) Conceptual design conceptual scheme optimization based on integrated design objectives. Concurr Eng 26:231–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Buyukozkan G, Ates NY (2007) A two phase multi-attribute decision-making approach for new product introduction. Inf Sci 177(7):1567–1582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Cebi S, Kaya I (2010) Selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design: the case of Turkey. J Univ Comput Sci 16:82–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan MF, Wang G, Bhuiyan MZA (2019) Wi-Fi frequency selection concept for effective coverage in collapsed structures. Future Gener Comput Syst 97:409–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King AM, Sivaloganathan S (1999) Development of a methodology for concept selection in flexible design strategies. J Eng Des 10:329–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Yu S, Chu J (2018a) Optimal selection of manufacturing services in cloud manufacturing: a novel hybrid MCDM approach based on rough ANP and rough TOPSIS. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 34:4041–4056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M-Y, Fan Z-P, You T-H (2018b) Screening alternatives considering different evaluation index sets: A method based on soft set theory. Appl Soft Comput 64:614–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin MC, Wang CC, Chen MS, Chang A (2008) Using AHP and TOPSIS approaches in customer-driven product design process. Comput Ind 59:17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CT, Lee C, Chen WY (2009) Using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to evaluate service performance of a travel intermediary. Serv Ind J 29:281–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma X, Liu Q, Zhan J (2016) A survey of decision making methods based on certain hybrid soft set models. Artif Intell Rev 47:507–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maji PK, Biswas R, Roy AR (2002) An application of soft sets in decision makings problems. Comput Math Appl 44:1077–1083

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Maji PK, Biswas R, Roy AR (2003) Soft set theory. Comput Math Appl 45:555–562

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy IP, Tsinopoulos C, Allen P, Rose-Anderssen C (2006) New product development as a complex adaptive system of decisions. J Prod Innov Manag 23:437–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molodtsov D (1999) Soft set theory-first results. Comput Math Appl 37:19–31

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nevins JL, Whitney D (1989) Concurrent design of products and processes—a strategy for the next generation in manufacturing. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nikander JB, Liikkanen LA, Laakso M (2014) The preference effect in design concept evaluation. Des Stud 35:473–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156:445–455

    Article  MATH  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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon CE, Weaver W (1947) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois press, Champaign

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shidpour H, Cunha CD, Bernard A (2016) Group multi-criteria design concept evaluation using combined rough set theory and fuzzy set theory. Expert Syst Appl 64:633–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sii HS, Wang J (2003) A design-decision support framework for evaluation of design options/proposals using a composite structure methodology based on the approximate reasoning approach and the evidential reasoning method. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part E J Process Mech Eng 217:59–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari V, Jain PK, Tandon P (2017) A bijective soft set theoretic approach for concept selection in design process. J Eng Des 28:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari V, Jain PK, Tandon P (2016) Product design concept evaluation using rough sets and VIKOR method. Adv Eng Inform 30:16–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari V, Jain PK, Tandon P (2019) An integrated Shannon entropy and TOPSIS for product design concept evaluation based on bijective soft set. J Intell Manuf 30:1645–1658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang CH (2009) Outlier identification and market segmentation using kernel-based clustering techniques. Expert Syst Appl 36:3744–3750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang TC, Lee HD (2009) Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights. Expert Syst Appl 36:8980–8985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitney DT (1988) Manufacturing by design. Harv Bus Rev 66:83–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Zapata JC, Varma VA, Reklaitis GV (2008) Impact of tactical and operational policies in the selection of a new product portfolio. Comput Chem Eng 32:307–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang D, Zhang J, Lai K-K, Lu Y (2009) An novel approach to supplier selection based on vague sets group decision. Expert Syst Appl 36:9557–9563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitnick CL, Kande T (2004) Maximum entropy for collaborative filtering. In: ACM proceedings of the 20th conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence, pp 636–643

  • Zhu G, Hu J, Qi J, Gu C-C, Peng Y-H (2015) An integrated AHP and VIKOR for design concept evaluation based on rough number. Adv Eng Inform 29:408–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is supported by the High Level Construction Fund of Guangzhou University, China. Also this work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation (61877014), Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2017A030307020, 2016A030307037, 2016A030313552), the Guangdong Provincial Government to Guangdong International Student Scholarship (yuejiao [2014] 187), Guangzhou Vocational College of Science and Technology (No. 2016TD03) and the Foundation of Hanshan Normal University (QD20171001, LQ201702).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Khizar Hayat.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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

Additional information

Communicated by V. Loia.

Publisher's Note

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

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 313 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hayat, K., Ali, M.I., Karaaslan, F. et al. Design concept evaluation using soft sets based on acceptable and satisfactory levels: an integrated TOPSIS and Shannon entropy. Soft Comput 24, 2229–2263 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04055-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04055-7

Keywords

Navigation