Skip to main content
Log in

Decision-making method based on new entropy and refined single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application in typhoon disaster assessment

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study proposes a multi-attribute decision-making method for the decision-making problems with attributes and sub-attribute where the attribute weight is unknown, based on information entropy and the evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) method under a refined single-valued neutrosophic set environment. First, the new distance measure, similarity measure, and neutrosophic entropy based on refined single-valued neutrosophic sets are defined. Further, the relationship between them is discussed and the attribute weights are determined based on the new neutrosophic entropy. Then, the EDAS method is used to rank and select the best alternative. Finally, two illustrative examples of typhoon disaster assessment (typhoon disaster assessment with multi-layer indicators and dynamic assessment of typhoon disaster) are presented to demonstrate the feasibility, effectiveness, and practicality of the proposed method. The advantages of the proposed method are illustrated by sensitive analysis and comparative analysis with other 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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yan HB, Ma T, Huynh VN (2017) On qualitative multi-attribute group decision making and its consensus measure: a probability based perspective. Omega 70:94–117

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sahin M, Olgun N, Uluçay V, Kargın A, Smarandache F (2017) A new similarity measure based on falsity value between single valued neutrosophic sets based on the centroid points of transformed single valued neutrosophic numbers with applications to pattern recognition. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 15:31–48

    Google Scholar 

  3. Garg H, Nancy (2017) Some new biparametric distance measures on single-valued neutrosophic sets with applications to pattern recognition and medical diagnosis. Information 8(4):162. https://doi.org/10.3390/info8040162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Broumi S, Smarandache F (2014) Neutrosophic refined similarity measure based on cosine function. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 6:42–48

    Google Scholar 

  5. Liu PD, Wang P (2018) Some interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy Schweizer-Sklar power aggregation operators and their application to supplier selection. Int J Syst Sci 49(6):1188–1211

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Peng XD, Li WQ (2019) Algorithms for interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets in emergency decision making based on multiparametric similarity measures and WDBA. IEEE Access 7:7419–7441

    Google Scholar 

  7. Tan RP, Zhang WD, Chen SQ (2018) Exponential aggregation operator of interval neutrosophic numbers and its application in typhoon disaster evaluation. Symmetry 10:196. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10060196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abdel-Basset M, Gunasekaran M, Mohamed M, Smarandache F (2019) A novel method for solving the fully neutrosophic linear programming problems. Neural Comput. Appl. 31(5):1595–1605

    Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

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

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Yager RR, Abbasov AM (2013) Pythagorean membership grades, complex numbers, and decision making, Int. J Intell Syst 28(5):436–452

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fei L, Wang H, Chen L, Deng Y (2019) A new vector valued similarity measure for intuitionistic fuzzy sets based on OWA operators. Iran J Fuzzy Syst 16(3):113–126

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Fei L, Yong D (2019) Multi-criteria decision making in Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Appl Intell:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-019-01532-2

  14. Smarandache F (1998) Neutrosophy: Neutrosophic probability, set, and logic. American Research Press, Rehoboth

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 4:410–413

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2005) Interval Neutrosophic sets and logic: theory and applications in computing. Phoenix, Hexis

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Ye J (2014) A multicriteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:2459–2466

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang JQ, Li XE (2015) TODIM method with multi-valued neutrosophic sets. Control Decis 30:1139–1142

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yang W, Pang Y (2018) New multiple attribute decision making method based on DEMATEL and TOPSIS for multi-valued interval neutrosophic sets. Symmetry 10:115. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10040115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Deli I, Ali M, Smarandache F (2015) Bipolar neutrosophic sets and their applications based on multicriteria decision making problems. In: International conference on advanced mechatronic systems. IEEE, Beijing, pp 249–254

    Google Scholar 

  21. Deli İ, Şubaş Y (2016) Bipolar neutrosophic refined sets and their applications in medical diagnosis international. In: Conference on natural science and engineering (ICNASE’ 16). Kilis, Turkey, pp 1121–1132

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ali M, Son LH, Deli I, Tien ND (2017) Bipolar neutrosophic soft sets and applications in decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(6):4077–4087

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tian ZP, Wang J, Zhang HY, Chen XH, Wang JQ (2015) Simplified neutrosophic linguistic normalized weighted Bonferroni mean operator and its application to multi-criteria decision-making problems. Filomat 3(2):ii–ii

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014) Cosine similarity measure based multi-attribute decision-making with trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 8:46–56

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ye J (2015) Trapezoidal neutrosophic set and its application to multiple attribute decision-making. Neural Comput Applic 26:1157–1166

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tan RP, Zhang WD (2017) Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(4):2547–2564

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Broumi S, Smarandache F, Talea M, Bakali A (2016) An introduction to bipolar single valued neutrosophic graph theory. Appl Mech Mater 841:184–191

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tan RP, Zhang WD, Broumi S (2019) Solving methods of the shortest path problem based on the trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. Control Decis 34(4):851–860

    Google Scholar 

  29. Liu PD, You XL (2019) Bidirectional projection measure of linguistic neutrosophic numbers and their application to multi-criteria group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 128:447–457

    Google Scholar 

  30. Abdel-Basset M, Saleh M, Gamal A, Smarandache F (2019) An approach of TOPSIS technique for developing supplier selection with group decision making under type-2 neutrosophic number. Appl Soft Comput 77:438–452

    Google Scholar 

  31. Chen JQ, Ye J, Du SG (2017) Vector similarity measures between refined simplified neutrosophic sets and their multiple attribute decision-making method. Symmetry 9(8):153

    Google Scholar 

  32. Smarandache F (2013) N-valued refined neutrosophic logic and its applications in physics. Prog Phys 4:143–146

    Google Scholar 

  33. Broumi S, Smarandache F (2014) Neutrosophic refined similarity measure based on cosine function. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 6:42–48

    Google Scholar 

  34. Broumi S, Deli I (2014) Correlation measure for neutrosophic refined sets and its application in medical diagnosis. Palest J Math 3:11–19

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Ye S, Ye J (2014) Dice similarity measure between single valued neutrosophic multisets and its application in medical diagnosis. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 6:49–54

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mondal K, Pramanik S (2015) Neutrosophic refined similarity measure based on tangent function and its application to multi attribute decision making. J New Theory 8:41–50

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ye J, Smarandache F (2016) Similarity measure of refined single-valued neutrosophic sets and its multicriteria decision making method. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 12:41–44

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fan CX, Ye J (2017) The cosine measure of refined-single valued neutrosophic sets and refined-interval neutrosophic sets for multiple attribute decision-making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(4):2281–2289

    Google Scholar 

  39. Chen XM, Liu YZ (2016) Management SO. Method of group recommender systems with unknown attribute weights in a multi-granular hesitant fuzzy linguistic term environment. Control Decis 31(09):1631–1637

    Google Scholar 

  40. Harish G (2018) A linear programming method based on an improved score function for interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy numbers and its application to decision-making. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 26(01):67–80

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Han Z, Liu P (2011) A fuzzy multi-atribute decision-making method under risk with unknown attribute weights. Technol Econ Dev Econ 17(2):246–258

    Google Scholar 

  42. Liu PD, Wang YZ (2012) Method of hybrid multi-attribute decision-making with risk of interval probability under attribute weight unknown. Control Decis 27(2):276–280

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  43. Ye J (2014) Multiple attribute group decision-making method with completely unknown weights based on similarity measures under single valued neutrosophic environment. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(6):2927–2935

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Tan R, Zhang W, Chen S (2017) Some generalized single valued neutrosophic linguistic operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. J Syst Sci Inform 5(2):148–162

    Google Scholar 

  45. Xiong WT, Jing C (2018) A novel method for determining the attribute weights in the multiple attribute decision-making with neutrosophic information through maximizing the generalized single-valued neutrosophic deviation. Information 9(6):137. https://doi.org/10.3390/info9060137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Li YY, Wang JQ, Wang TL (2019) A linguistic neutrosophic multi-criteria group decision-making approach with EDAS method. Arabian J Sci Eng 44:2737–2749

    Google Scholar 

  47. Liu PD, Teng F (2019) Probabilistic linguistic TODIM method for selecting products through online product reviews. Inf Sci 485:441–455

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hwang CL, Yoon KP (1981) Multiple attribute decision making. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Goumas M, Lygerou V (2000) An extension of the PROMETHEE method for decision making in fuzzy environment: ranking of alternative energy exploitation projects. Eur J Oper Res 123(3):606–613

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Akram M, Waseem N, Liu P (2019) Novel approach in decision making with m-polar fuzzy ELECTRE-I. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21(4):1117–1129

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  51. Deshmukh D, Angira M (2019) Investigation on switching structure material selection for RF-MEMS shunt capacitive switches using Ashby, TOPSIS and VIKOR. Trans Electr Electron Mater 20(3):181–188

    Google Scholar 

  52. Liang D, Kobina A, Quan W (2018) Grey relational analysis method for probabilistic linguistic multi-criteria group decision-making based on geometric Bonferroni mean. Int J Fuzzy Syst 20(7):2234–2244

    Google Scholar 

  53. Hafezalkotob A, Hafezalkotob A, Liao H, 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 99:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2018.2889730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Zhang ZX, Wang L, Wang YM (2018) An emergency decision making method based on prospect theory for different emergency situations. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 9(03):407–420

    Google Scholar 

  55. Zhang YL, Xu YY, Li JY (2018) Study on emergency decision-making method of urban fire based on case-based reasoning under incomplete information. J Safety Sci Tech 14(3):13–18

    Google Scholar 

  56. Hu J, Yang Y, Zhang X, Chen X (2018) Similarity and entropy measures for hesitant fuzzy sets. Int Trans Oper Res 25(3):857–886

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Keshavarz GM, Zavadskas EK, Olfat L, Turskis Z (2015) Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS). Informatica 26(3):435–451

    Google Scholar 

  58. Karasan A, Kahraman C (2018) A novel interval-valued neutrosophic EDAS method: prioritization of the United Nations national sustainable development goals. Soft Comput 22(15):4891–4906

    Google Scholar 

  59. Zhang S, Gao H, Wei G, Wei Y, Wei C (2019) Evaluation based on distance from average solution method for multiple criteria group decision making under picture 2-tuple linguistic environment. Mathematics 7(3):243. https://doi.org/10.3390/math7030243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Liang W, Zhao G, Luo S (2018) An integrated EDAS-ELECTRE method with picture fuzzy information for cleaner production evaluation in gold mines. IEEE Access 6:65747–65759. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2878747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Kahraman C, Keshavarz Ghorabaee M, Zavadskas EK et al (2017) Intuitionistic fuzzy EDAS method: an application to solid waste disposal site selection. J Environ Eng Landsc Manag 25(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  62. Peng X, Liu C (2017) Algorithms for neutrosophic soft decision making based on Edas and new similarity measure. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(1):955–968

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  63. Ren R, Yu D, Wang L, Wang K, Wang H, He S (2019) Typhoon triggered operation tunnel debris flow disaster in coastal areas of SE China. Geomat Nat Haz Risk 10(1):562–575

    Google Scholar 

  64. Yin J, Yin Z, Xu SY (2013) Composite risk assessment of typhoon-induced disaster for China’s coastal area. Nat Hazards 69(3):1423–1434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0755-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Shi Y, Kou G, Li YY, Wang GX, Peng Y (2010) FMCDM: a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making hybrid approach to evaluate the damage level of typhoon: integration of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Information Sciences & Interaction Sciences. IEEE, Chengdu, pp 666–671

    Google Scholar 

  66. He X (2018) Typhoon disaster assessment based on Dombi hesitant fuzzy information aggregation operators. Nat Hazards 90(3):1153–1175

    Google Scholar 

  67. Li C, Zhang L, Zeng S (2015) Typhoon disaster evaluation based on extension of intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method in Zhejiang Province of China. Int J Earth Sci Eng 8:1031–1035

    Google Scholar 

  68. Yu DJ (2015) Intuitionistic fuzzy theory based typhoon disaster evaluation in Zhejiang Province, China: a comparative perspective. Nat Hazards 75:2559–2576

    Google Scholar 

  69. Tang M, Liao HC, Li ZM, Xu ZS (2018) Nature disaster risk evaluation with a group decision making method based on incomplete hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(4):751. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15040751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Xiong WT, Jing C (2018) A novel method for determining the attribute weights in the multiple attribute decision-making with neutrosophic information through maximizing the generalized single-valued neutrosophic deviation. Information 9(6):137

    Google Scholar 

  71. Sahin R, Zhang H (2018) Induced simplified neutrosophic correlated aggregation operators for multi-criteria group decision-making. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 30:279–292

    Google Scholar 

  72. Şahin R (2014) Multi-criteria neutrosophic decision making method based on score and accuracy functions under neutrosophic environment. Comput Sci arXiv:1412.5202

    Google Scholar 

  73. Kang B, Deng Y (2019) The maximum Deng entropy. IEEE Access 7:120758–120765

    Google Scholar 

  74. Deng Y (2015) Deng entropy: a generalized shannon entropy to measure uncertainty, viXra 1502.0222. URL http://vixra.org/abs/1502.0222

  75. Zhang QS, Xing HY, Liu FC, Ye J, Tang P (2014) Some new entropy measures for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets based on distances and their relationships with similarity and inclusion measures. Inf Sci 283:55–69

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Ye J, Du S (2019) Some distances, similarity and entropy measures for interval-valued neutrosophic sets and their relationship. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 10(2):347–355

    Google Scholar 

  77. Yu XB, Lu YQ, Wang XM, Luo X, Cai M (2017) Typhoon disaster emergency scheme generation & dynamic adjustment based on CBR and prospect theory. Fuzzy Syst Math 31(5):182–190

    Google Scholar 

  78. Wang X, Triantaphyllou E (2008) Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some electre methods. Omega 36(1):45–63

    Google Scholar 

  79. Kumar K, Garg H (2018) Connection number of set pair analysis based TOPSIS method on intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their application to decision making. Appl Intell 48:2112–2119

    Google Scholar 

  80. Faruk K, Khizar H (2018) Some new operations on single-valued neutrosophic matrices and their applications in multi-criteria group decision making. Appl Intell 48(12):4594–4614

    Google Scholar 

  81. Karaaslan F (2015) Multi-criteria decision making method based on similarity measures under single valued neutrosophic refined and interval neutrosophic refined environments. Int J Intell Syst 3:1–15 https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03687

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ye J (2014) Vector similarity measures of simplified neutrosophic sets and their application in multicriteria decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 16(2):204–211

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ye J, Fu J (2016) Multi-period medical diagnosis method using a single valued neutrosophic similarity measure based on tangent function. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 123:142–149

    Google Scholar 

  84. Pramanik S, Dey PP, Giri BC (2017) Hybrid vector similarity measure of single valued refined neutrosophic sets to multi-attribute decision making problems. In: Smarandache F, Pramanik S (eds) New trends in neutrosophic theory and applications, volume II, pp 156–164

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (No. 17CGL058).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors contributed to this paper. The individual responsibilities and contributions of all authors are as follows. The idea for this study was proposed by Ruipu Tan, who also wrote the paper. Wende Zhang analyzed the existing work regarding the research problem. Revision and submission of this paper was carried out by Ruipu Tan.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui-pu Tan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Appendix

Appendix

Here, we prove the properties of Theorem 1 and Theorem 3.

(1) Proof of the three properties of Theorem 1:

Proof.

(P1) 0 ≤ TjM(xi),  IjM(xi),  FjM(xi),  TjN(xi),  IjN(xi),  FjN(xi) ≤ 1, then 0 ≤ |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)| ≤ 1, 0 ≤ |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)| ≤ 1, 0 ≤ |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)| ≤ 1, and 0 ≤ |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)|λ ≤ 1, 0 ≤ |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)|λ ≤ 1, 0 ≤ |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)|λ ≤ 1, so \( 0\le \frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\le 1 \),

\( 0\le {\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}\le 1 \),\( 0\le \frac{1}{n}\sum \limits_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}\le 1 \).

Thus, 0 ≤ D(M, N) ≤ 1 is established.

(P2) If M = N, then TjM(xi) = TjN(xi), IjM(xi) = IjN(xi), FjM(xi) = FjN(xi), TjM(xi) − TjN(xi) = 0,

IjM(xi) − IjN(xi) = 0, FjM(xi) − FjN(xi) = 0,

so |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)|λ + |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)|λ + |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)|λ = 0,

$$ \frac{1}{n}\sum \limits_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}=0, $$

that is, D(M, N) = 0.

Conversely, if D(M, N) = 0, then |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)|λ + |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)|λ + |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)|λ = 0,

TjM(xi) − TjN(xi) = 0, IjM(xi) − IjN(xi) = 0, FjM(xi) − FjN(xi) = 0, then TjM(xi) = TjN(xi), IjM(xi) = IjN(xi), FjM(xi) = FjN(xi), so M = N. Thus, we can get D(M, N) = 0 if and only if M = N.

(P3) |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)| = |TjN(xi) − TjM(xi)|, |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)| = |IjN(xi) − IjM(xi)|, |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)| = |FjN(xi) − FjM(xi)|, so |TjM(xi) − TjN(xi)|λ = |TjN(xi) − TjM(xi)|λ, |IjM(xi) − IjN(xi)|λ = |IjN(xi) − IjM(xi)|λ, |FjM(xi) − FjN(xi)|λ = |FjN(xi) − FjM(xi)|λ,

$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\\ {}=\left({\left|{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right),\end{array}} $$
$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{n}\sum \limits_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}\\ {}=\frac{1}{n}\sum \limits_{i=1}^n\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{T}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{I}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jN}\left({x}_i\right)-{F}_{jM}\left({x}_i\right)\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.},\end{array}} $$

Thus, D(M, N) = D(N, M) is established.

(2) Proof of the four properties of Theorem 3:

Proof.

(P1) If r is a crisp number, then r is not fuzzy; thus, its entropy is zero. In this case, for example r = 〈(1, 1, ⋯, k times), (0, 0, ⋯, k times), (0, 0, ⋯, k times)〉, or r = 〈(0, 0, ⋯, k times), (0, 0, ⋯, k times), (1, 1, ⋯, k times)〉,

So \( {E}_{RSVNN}(r)==1-2D\left(r,{r}^{\prime}\right)=1-2\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({0.5}^{\lambda }+{0.5}^{\lambda }+{0.5}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}=0. \)

Thus, we can get ERSVNN(r) = 0if r is a crisp number.

(P2) Because ERSVNN(r) = 1, that is 1 ‐ 2D(r, r') = 1, then D(r, r') = 0. Based on the Theorem 1 of Section 3.2, we can get r = r' = 〈(0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times)〉.

If r = r' = 〈(0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times)〉, then D(r, r') = 0, 1 ‐ 2D(r, r') = 1, so ERSVNN(r) = 1. Thus, we can get ERSVNN(r) = 1, if and only if r = r' = 〈(0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times), (0.5, 0.5, ⋯, k times)〉;

(P3) If D(r, r') ≥ D(l, r'), then 2D(r, r') ≥ 2D(l, r'), 1 ‐ 2D(r, r') ≤ 1 ‐ 2D(l, r').

Thus, ERSVNN(r) = 1 ‐ 2D(r, r') ≤ ERSVNN(l) = 1 ‐ 2D(l, r'). If D(r, r') ≥ D(l, r'), ERSVNN(r) ≤ ERSVNN(l), that is, Theorem 3 (3) is established.

(P4) Because rc = 〈(F1r, F2r, ⋯, Fkr), (1 − I1r, 1 − I2r, ⋯, 1 − Ikr), (T1r, T2r, ⋯, Tkr)〉,

$$ {E}_{RSVNN}(r)=1-2D\left(r,{r}^{\prime}\right)=1-2\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{T}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{I}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{F}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}, $$
$$ {E}_{RSVNN}\left({r}^c\right)=1-2D\left({r}^c,{r}^{\prime}\right)=1-2\frac{1}{k}\sum \limits_{j=1}^k{\left\{\frac{1}{3}\left({\left|{F}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|1-{I}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda }+{\left|{T}_{jr}\left({x}_i\right)-0.5\right|}^{\lambda}\right)\right\}}^{\raisebox{1ex}{$1$}\!\left/ \!\raisebox{-1ex}{$\lambda $}\right.}. $$

Thus, we can get ERSVNN(r) = ERSVNN(rc).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tan, Rp., Zhang, Wd. Decision-making method based on new entropy and refined single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application in typhoon disaster assessment. Appl Intell 51, 283–307 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-01706-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-01706-3

Keywords

Navigation