Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prioritizing the solution of cloud service selection using integrated MCDM methods under Fuzzy environment

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cloud service selection plays a crucial role in terms of on-demand service selection on a subscription basis. As a result of wide-range availability of cloud services with similar functionalities, it is very crucial to determine which service best addresses the user’s desires and objectives. This paper aims to design a new cloud service selection model under the fuzzy environment by utilizing the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS). The AHP method is enforced to configure the structure of cloud service selection problem and to impel the criteria weight using the pairwise comparisons, and the TOPSIS method utilizes the final ranking of the solution. In our proposed model, the non-functional quality of service requirements is taken into consideration for selecting appropriate service. Furthermore, the proposed model exploits a set of pre-defined linguistic variables, parameterized by triangular fuzzy numbers for evaluating each criteria weights. The experimental results obtained using the real-time cloud service domains prove the efficacy of our proposed model and demonstrate the effectiveness by inducing better performance, when compared against other available cloud service selection algorithms. Finally, the sensitivity analysis is persuaded to confirm the robustness of our proposed model.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://cloudharmony.com/.

References

  1. Albayrak E, Erensal YC (2004) Using analytic hierarchy process (ahp) to improve human performance: an application of multiple criteria decision making problem. J Intell Manuf 15(4):491–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alhamad M, Dillon T, Chang E (2011) A trust-evaluation metric for cloud applications. Int J Mach Learn Comput 1(4):416–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amiri MP (2010) Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl 37(9):6218–6224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ardagna D, Casale G, Ciavotta M, Pérez JF, Wang W (2014) Quality-of-service in cloud computing: modeling techniques and their applications. J Internet Serv Appl 5(1):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ballı S, Korukoğlu S (2009) Operating system selection using fuzzy ahp and topsis methods. Math Comput Appl 14(2):119–130

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Buyya R, Yeo CS, Venugopal S, Broberg J, Brandic I (2009) Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms: vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility. Future Gener Comput Syst 25(6):599–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chahal RK, Singh S (2016) Fuzzy logic and ahp-based ranking of cloud service providers. Comput Intell Data Min 1:337–346

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chan FT, Kumar N (2007a) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended ahp-based approach. Omega 35(4):417–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan FT, Kumar N (2007b) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended ahp-based approach. Omega 35(4):417–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen CT, Lin CT, Huang SF (2006) A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. Int J Prod Econ 102(2):289–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chen CT, Hung WZ, Zhang WY (2013) Using interval valued fuzzy vikor for cloud service provider evaluation and selection. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Business and Information (BAI’13)

  13. Chen F, Dou R, Li M, Wu H (2015) A flexible QoS-aware web service composition method by multi-objective optimization in cloud manufacturing. Comput Indus Eng 99:423–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Christopher Frey H, Patil SR (2002) Identification and review of sensitivity analysis methods. Risk Anal 22(3):553–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dağdeviren M, Yavuz S, Kılınç N (2009) Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):8143–8151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dastjerdi AV, Buyya R (2011) A taxonomy of QoS management and service selection methodologies for cloud computing. In: Wang L, Ranjan R, Chen J, Benatallah B (eds) Cloud computing: methodology, systems, and applications, vol 15. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 16–76

    Google Scholar 

  17. Daug deviren M, Yuksel I (2008) Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (ahp) model for behavior-based safety management. Inf Sci 178(6):1717–1733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ertuugrul I, Karaka csouglu N (2008) Comparison of fuzzy ahp and fuzzy topsis methods for facility location selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 39(7):783–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Garg SK, Versteeg S, Buyya R (2013) A framework for ranking of cloud computing services. Future Gener Comput Syst 29(4):1012–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Godse M, Mulik S (2009) An approach for selecting software-as-a-service (saas) product. In: IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing, pp 155–158

  21. Gumus AT (2009) Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-ahp and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Syst Appl 36(2, Part 2):4067–4074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Heilig L, Lalla-Ruiz E, Voß S (2016) A cloud brokerage approach for solving the resource management problem in multi-cloud environments. Comput Indus Eng 95:16–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hwang CL, Yoon K (2012) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, vol 186. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Hwang CL, Lai YJ, Liu TY (1993) A new approach for multiple objective decision making. Comput Oper Res 20(8):889–899

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Jahani A, Khanli LM (2016) Cloud service ranking as a multi objective optimization problem. J Supercomput 72(5):1897–1926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jatoth C, Gangadharan G, Fiore U (2016) Evaluating the efficiency of cloud services using modified data envelopment analysis and modified super-efficiency data envelopment analysis. Soft Comput. doi:10.1007/s00500-016-2267-y

  27. Junior FRL, Osiro L, Carpinetti LCR (2014) A comparison between fuzzy ahp and fuzzy topsis methods to supplier selection. Appl Soft Comput 21:194–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Karami A, Guo Z (2012) A fuzzy logic multi-criteria decision framework for selecting it service providers. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences HICSS 2012, Maui, Hawaii, 4–7 Jan 2012. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 1118–1127. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2012.59

  29. Karim R, Ding C, Miri A (2013) An end-to-end QoS mapping approach for cloud service selection. In: Ninth IEEE World Congress on Services, pp 341–348

  30. Kulak O, Kahraman C (2005) Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic hierarchy process. Inf Sci 170(2):191–210

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Le S, Dong H, Hussain FK, Hussain OK, Ma J, Zhang Y (2014) Multicriteria decision making with fuzziness and criteria interdependence in cloud service selection. In: IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), pp 1929–1936

  32. Lee S, Seo KK (2016) A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model for a cloud service selection problem using bsc, fuzzy delphi method and fuzzy ahp. Wirel Pers Commun 86(1):57–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lin SY, Lai CH, Wu CH, Lo CC (2014) A trustworthy QoS-based collaborative filtering approach for web service discovery. J Syst Softw 93:217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Liu S, Chan FT, Ran W (2016) Decision making for the selection of cloud vendor: an improved approach under group decision-making with integrated weights and objective/subjective attributes. Expert Syst Appl 55:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. McKendrick J (2006) Ten companies where SOA made a difference in 2006. http://www.zdnet.com/article/ten-companies-where-soa-made-a-difference-in-2006/

  36. Önüt S, Soner S (2008) Transshipment site selection using the ahp and topsis approaches under fuzzy environment. Waste Manag 28(9):1552–1559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Roy B (1991) The outranking approach and the foundations of electre methods. Theory Decis 31(1):49–73

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Saltelli A, Chan K, Scott EM (2000) Sensitivity analysis, vol 1. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Satty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. Shiraz M, Gani A, Khokhar RH, Buyya R (2013) A review on distributed application processing frameworks in smart mobile devices for mobile cloud computing. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 15(3):1294–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Shyur HJ, Shih HS (2006) A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection. Math Comput Modell 44(7):749–761

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Sidhu J, Singh S (2017) Improved TOPSIS method based trust evaluation framework for determining trustworthiness of cloud service providers. J Grid Comput 15:81–105. doi:10.1007/s10723-016-9363-1

  43. Sodhi B, Prabhakar TV (2012) A simplified description of Fuzzy TOPSIS. arXiv preprint arXiv:1205.5098

  44. Sun L, Dong H, Hussain FK, Hussain OK, Chang E (2014) Cloud service selection: state-of-the-art and future research directions. J Netw Comput Appl 45:134–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sun L, Ma J, Zhang Y, Dong H, Hussain FK (2016) Cloud-FuSeR: fuzzy ontology and MCDM based cloud service selection. Future Gener Comput Syst 57:42–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Supriya M, Sangeeta K, Patra G (2016) Trustworthy cloud service provider selection using multi criteria decision making methods. Eng Lett 24(1):1–10

  47. Tran VX, Tsuji H, Masuda R (2009) A new qos ontology and its QoS-based ranking algorithm for web services. Simul Model Pract Theory 17(8):1378–1398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. ur Rehman Z, Hussain OK, Hussain FK (2012) IaaS cloud selection using MCDM methods. In: Ninth IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE), pp 246–251

  49. ur Rehman Z, Hussain OK, Hussain FK (2014) Parallel cloud service selection and ranking based on QoS history. Int J Parallel Progr 42(5):820–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wang E (2015) Benchmarking whole-building energy performance with multi-criteria technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution using a selective objective-weighting approach. Appl Energy 146:92–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Wang JJ, Yang DL (2007) Using a hybrid multi-criteria decision aid method for information systems outsourcing. Comput Oper Res 34(12):3691–3700

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. Wang P (2009) QoS-aware web services selection with intuitionistic fuzzy set under consumer’s vague perception. Expert Syst Appl 36(3):4460–4466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Whaiduzzaman M, Gani A, Anuar NB, Shiraz M, Haque MN, Haque IT (2014) Cloud service selection using multicriteria decision analysis. Sci World J 2014. doi:10.1155/2014/459375

  54. Yang T, Hung CC (2007) Multiple-attribute decision making methods for plant layout design problem. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 23(1):126–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Yu X, Guo S, Guo J, Huang X (2011) Rank B2C e-commerce websites in e-alliance based on AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 38(4):3550–3557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  57. Zeleny M, Cochrane JL (1973) Multiple criteria decision making. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  58. (2014) Selecting a Cloud Provider. http://spark.adobe.com/page/PN39b/

  59. (2016) Cloud Harmony Reports. http://static.lindsberget.se/state-of-the-cloud-compute-0714.pdf. Online, Accessed 12 May 2016

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, Jharkhand, 826004, India

    Rakesh Ranjan Kumar, Siba Mishra & Chiranjeev Kumar

Authors
  1. Rakesh Ranjan Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Siba Mishra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chiranjeev Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rakesh Ranjan Kumar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, R.R., Mishra, S. & Kumar, C. Prioritizing the solution of cloud service selection using integrated MCDM methods under Fuzzy environment. J Supercomput 73, 4652–4682 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-2039-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-017-2039-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation