Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Local consistency adjustment strategy and DEA – driven interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy decision-making model and its application for fog-haze factor assessment problem

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims to develop a novel decision-making method with interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy preference (IT2TrFPR), which can deal with the complex decision information presented in the form of interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. In this paper, we mainly propose a novel interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy decision-making method with local consistency adjustment strategy and data envelopment analysis (DEA). Considering the harm of fog-haze pollution to the environment and human life, we apply the decision-making method to the problem about influence factors of for-haze weather. Firstly, we introduce the definition of IT2TrFPR that sufficiently expresses the uncertainty of original decision-making information. After that, we show the definition of the order consistency and additive consistency for IT2TrFPR. Considering that the original IT2TrFPR given by decision-makers usually does not satisfy the characteristic of consistency, to transform the unacceptable additive consistent IT2TrFPRs into acceptable ones, we design a consistency-improving algorithm that uses the local adjustment approach to preserve the original decision-making information as much as possible and avoids the original information loss. Then, an output-oriented interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy DEA model and the concept for quasi interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy priority weight are developed to derive the interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy priority weight vector (IT2TrFPW) and obtain the final ranking result of alternatives. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed decision-making method is demonstrated by a numerical example of selecting the most crucial fog-haze influence factor. Meanwhile, we also conduct a comparative analysis by comparing our method with the existing methods to show some merits of the proposed method.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Li C, Zhu Z (2018) Research and application of a novel hybrid air quality early-warning system: a case study in China. Sci Total Environ 626:1421–1438

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zhao D, Xin J, Gong C, Quan J, Liu G, Zhao W, Wang Y, Liu Z, Song T (2019) The formation mechanism of air pollution episodes in Beijing city: insights into the measured feedback between aerosol radiative forcing and the atmospheric boundary layer stability. Sci Total Environ 692:371–381

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chen Z, Cui L, Cui X, Li X, Yu K, Yue K, Dai Z, Zhou J, Jia G, Zhang J (2019) The association between high ambient air pollution exposure and respiratory health of young children: a cross sectional study in Jinan. China Sci Total Environ 656:740–749

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jin FF, Ni ZW, Pei LD et al (2019) A decision support model for group decision making with intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic preferences relations. Neural Comput Appl 31(S2):S1103–S1124

    Google Scholar 

  5. Liu C, Tang GL, Liu PD et al (2019) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic Archimedean aggregation operators in decision making with the Dempster–Shafer belief structure. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21:1330–1348

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Tanino T (1984) Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets Syst 12(2):117–131

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Wu Z, Xu J (2012) A concise consensus support model for group decision making with reciprocal preference relations based on deviation measures. Fuzzy Sets Syst 206:58–73

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill

  9. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Chiclana F (2001) Multiperson decision-making based on multiplicative preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 129(2):372–385

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Orlovsky SA (1978) Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1(3):155–167

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee HS (2005) On fuzzy preference relation in group decision making. Int J Comput Math 82(2):133–140

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Nurmi H (1981) Approaches to collective decision making with fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 6(3):249–259

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Deng XY, Jiang W (2019) Evaluating green supply chain management practices under fuzzy environment: a novel method based on D number theory. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21:1389–1402

    Google Scholar 

  14. Li CC, Dong Y, Xu Y, Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F (2019) An overview on managing additive consistency of reciprocal preference relations for consistency-driven decision making and fusion: taxonomy and future directions. Inform Fusion 52:143–156

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cao D, Leung LC, Law JS (2008) Modifying inconsistent comparison matrix in analytic hierarchy process: A heuristic approach. Dec Support Syst 44(4):944–953

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zeshui X, Cuiping W (1999) A consistency improving method in the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Resh 116(2):443–449

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Chiclana F, Luque M (2004) Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 154(1):98–109

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Dong Y, Xu Y, Li H (2008) On consistency measures of linguistic preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 189(2):430–444

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu F, Zhang WG, Zhang LH (2014) Consistency analysis of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations. Eur J Operat Res 235(3):718–726

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang ZJ, Tong X (2016) Consistency analysis and group decision making based on triangular fuzzy additive reciprocal preference relations. Inf Sci 361:29–47

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Herrera-Viedma E, Chiclana F, Herrera F et al (2007) Group decision-making model with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on additive consistency. IEEE Trans Syst, Man, Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) 37(1):176–189

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee LW (2012) Group decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on the additive consistency and the order consistency. Exp Syst Appl 39(14):11666–11676

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chen SM, Lin TE, Lee LW (2014) Group decision making using incomplete fuzzy preference relations based on the additive consistency and the order consistency. Inf Sci 259:1–15

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Liu J, Xu Q, Chen H, Zhou L, Zhu J, Tao Z (2019) Group decision making with interval fuzzy preference relations based on DEA and stochastic simulation. Neural Comput Applic 31(7):3095–3106

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ma J, Fan ZP, Jiang YP et al (2006) A method for repairing the inconsistency of fuzzy preference relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(1):20–33

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhang H (2019) Revisiting multiplicative consistency of interval fuzzy preference relation. Comput Ind Eng 132:325–332

    Google Scholar 

  27. Deli I, Eraslan S (2018) Çağman N ivnpiv-Neutrosophic soft sets and their decision making based on similarity measure. Neural Comput Appl 29:187–203

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mahdevari S, Shahriar K, Esfahanipour A (2014) Human health and safety risks management in underground coal mines using fuzzy TOPSIS. Sci Total Environ 488:85–99

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chen L, Xu Z (2015) A new fuzzy programming method to derive the priority vector from an interval reciprocal comparison matrix. Inf Sci 316:148–162

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Jin FF, Pei LD, Liu JP et al (2019) Decision-making model with fuzzy preference relations based on consistency local adjustment strategy and DEA. Neural Comput Applic 32:11607–11620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04648-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang YM, Chin KS A new data envelopment analysis method for priority determination and group decision making in the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 195, 2009(1):239–250

  32. Wu DD (2009) Performance evaluation: an integrated method using data envelopment analysis and fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 194(1):227–235

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Barak S, Dahooei JH (2018) A novel hybrid fuzzy DEA-fuzzy MADM method for airlines safety evaluation. J Air Transp Manag 73:134–149

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mousakhani S, Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Bozorgi-Amiri A (2017) A novel interval type-2 fuzzy evaluation model based group decision analysis for green supplier selection problems: a case study of battery industry. J Clean Prod 168:205–218

    Google Scholar 

  36. Qin J, Liu X (2015) Multi-attribute group decision making using combined ranking value under interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Inf Sci 297:293–315

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Meng F, Li S (2020) A new multiple attribute decision making method for selecting design schemes in sponge city construction with trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy information. Appl Intel 9

  38. Abdullah L, Najib L (2014) A new type-2 fuzzy set of linguistic variables for the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Expert Syst Appl 41(7):3297–3305

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wang W, Liu X, Qin Y (2012) Multi-attribute group decision making models under interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Knowl-Based Syst 30:121–128

    Google Scholar 

  40. Xu Y, Patnayakuni R, Wang H (2013) The ordinal consistency of a fuzzy preference relation. Inf Sci 224:152–164

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Xu Z, Chen J (2008) Some models for deriving the priority weights from interval fuzzy preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 184(1):266–280

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—I. Inform Sci 8(3):199–249

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Mendel JM (2007) Type-2 fuzzy sets and systems: an overview. IEEE Comp Intel Mag 2(1):20–29

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mendel JM, John RI, Liu F (2006) Interval type-2 fuzzy logic systems made simple. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 14(6):808–821

    Google Scholar 

  45. Chen TY (2013) A linear assignment method for multiple-criteria decision analysis with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput 13(5):2735–2748

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ngan SC (2013) A type-2 linguistic set theory and its application to multi-criteria decision making. Comput Indust Eng 64(2):721–730

    Google Scholar 

  47. Zhang Z, Zhang S (2013) A novel approach to multi attribute group decision making based on trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy soft sets. Appl Math Model 37(7):4948–4971

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Zhang Z, Guo C (2014) Consistency-based algorithms to estimate missing elements for uncertain 2-tuple linguistic preference relations. Int J Comput Intel Syst 7(5):924–936

    Google Scholar 

  49. Liu JP, Chen PP, Chen HY et al (2018) The ranking method of interval linguistic preference relations based on cross efficiency DEA and stochastic simulation. Syst Eng-Theory Pract 38(4):950–959

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ma X, Wu P, Zhou L, Chen H, Zheng T, Ge J (2016) Approaches based on interval type-2 fuzzy aggregation operators for multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst 18(4):697–715

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  51. Chen S M, Lee L W. Fuzzy multiple criteria hierarchical group decision-making based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets. IEEE Trans Syst, Man, Cybernetics-Part A: Syst Humans, 40(5) (2010) 1120–1128

  52. Yao LM (2020) Incomplete interval type-2 fuzzy preference relations based on a multi-criteria group decision-making model for the evaluation of wastewater treatment technologies. et al., Measurement (151):107137

  53. Jin F, Ni Z, Chen H, Li Y (2016) Approaches to decision making with linguistic preference relations based on additive consistency. Appl Soft Comput 49:71–80

    Google Scholar 

  54. Gou X, Liao H, Xu Z, Min R, Herrera F (2019) Group decision making with double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations: consistency based measures, index and repairing algorithms and decision model. Inf Sci 489:93–112

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 71901001, 72071001, 71871001), the Humanities and Social Sciences Planning Project of the Ministry of Education (No. 20YJAZH066), Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province (Nos. 2008085QG333, 2008085MG226), Key Research Project of Humanities and Social Sciences in Colleges and Universities of Anhui Province (Nos. SK2019A0013, SK2020A0038), Project of Anhui Ecological and Economic Development Research Center (No. AHST2019009).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Feifei Jin

    Present address: School of Business, Anhui University, No. 111 Jiulong Road, Hefei, 230601, Anhui, China

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, Anhui University, No. 111 Jiulong Road, Hefei, 230601, Anhui, China

    Jinpei Liu & Yun Zheng

  2. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    Jinpei Liu

  3. School of Mathematical Sciences, Anhui University, Hefei, 230601, Anhui, China

    Huayou Chen

Authors
  1. Jinpei Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Feifei Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Huayou Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feifei Jin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict 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.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, J., Zheng, Y., Jin, F. et al. Local consistency adjustment strategy and DEA – driven interval type-2 trapezoidal fuzzy decision-making model and its application for fog-haze factor assessment problem. Appl Intell 52, 1653–1671 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02354-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02354-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation