Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Probabilistic Hesitant Fuzzy Taxonomy Method Based on Best–Worst-Method (BWM) and Indifference Threshold-Based Attribute Ratio Analysis (ITARA) for Multi-attributes Decision-Making

  • Published:
International Journal of Fuzzy Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The probabilistic hesitant fuzzy set (PHFS) is an important extension of hesitant fuzzy set (HFS), which can more accurately describe the uncertainty of elements and can show more flexibility of decision maker (DM) in the process of decision-making. Taxonomy method is a useful tool for grading, classifying, and comparing different activities with respect to their advantages and utility degree from studied attributes. In this paper, a probabilistic hesitant fuzzy Taxonomy method based on Best–Worst-Method (BWM) and Indifference Threshold-based Attribute Ratio Analysis (ITARA) for multi-attributes decision-making (MADM) is presented. First, the definitions about PHFS and probabilistic hesitant fuzzy element (PHFE) are introduced, and some corresponding operations are given. Second, we adopt BWM to obtain subjective weights and ITARA approach to obtain objective weights, by combining the subjective weights and objective weights together; we can derive the final weights. Furthermore, we extend the Taxonomy method to the PHFS. Finally, an example of selecting research topic is given to illustrate the usefulness of our proposed method. Compared with other useful methods, the validity and superiority of our proposed method can be showed.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aggarwal, M.: Hesitant information sets and application in group decision making. Appl. Soft Comput. 75, 120–129 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cao, Q., Liu, X.D., Wang, Z.W., Zhang, S.T., Wu, J.: Recommendation decision-making algorithm for sharing accommodation using probabilistic hesitant fuzzy sets and bipartite network projection. Complex Intell. Syst. 6(2), 431–445 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen, C.T.: Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 114(1), 1–9 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, N., Xu, Z.S.: Hesitant fuzzy ELECTRE II approach: a new way to handle multi-criteria decision making problems. Inf. Sci. 292, 175–197 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Davoudabadi, R., Mousavi, S.M., Mohagheghi, V.: A new last aggregation method of multi-attributes group decision making based on concepts of TODIM, WASPAS and TOPSIS under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertainty. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 62(4), 1371–1391 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ding, J., Xu, Z.S., Zhao, N.: An interactive approach to probabilistic hesitant fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making with incomplete weight information. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 32(3), 2523–2536 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Guo, J., Yin, J.L., Zhang, L., et al.: Extended TODIM method for CCUS storage site selection under probabilistic hesitant fuzzy environment. Appl. Soft Comput. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hatefi, M.A.: Indifference threshold-based attribute ratio analysis: a method for assigning the weights to the attributes in multiple attribute decision making. Appl. Soft Comput. 74, 643–651 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. He, T.T., Wei, G.W., Lu, J.P., et al.: Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic taxonomy method for supplier selection in medical instrument industries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. He, Y., Xu, Z.S.: Multi-attribute decision making methods based on reference ideal theory with probabilistic hesitant information. Expert Syst. Appl. 118, 459–469 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jato-Espino, D., Castillo-Lopez, E., Rodriguez-Hernandez, J., et al.: A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction. Autom. Constr. 45, 151–162 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jurkowska, B.: The Federal States of Germany—analysis and measurement of development using taxonomic methods. Oecon. Copernic. 5(3), 49–73 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Krassimir, A.: Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20, 87–96 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Krishankumar, R., Ravichandran, K.S., Liu, P.D., Kar, S., Gandomi, A.H.: A decision framework under probabilistic hesitant fuzzy environment with probability estimation for multi-criteria decision making. Neural Comput. Appl. 33(14), 8417–8433 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Li, J., Chen, Q.X.: An outranking method for multicriteria decision making with probabilistic hesitant information. Expert Syst. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Li, J., Wang, J.Q.: An extended QUALIFLEX method under probability hesitant fuzzy environment for selecting green suppliers. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 6(19), 1866–1879 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Li, X.D., Wang, Z.W., Zhang, S.T., Chen, Y.F.: Investment decision making along the B&R using CRITIC approach in probabilistic hesitant fuzzy environment. J. Bus. Econ. Manag. 21(6), 1683–1706 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lin, Z.M., Huang, C., Lin, M.W.: Probabilistic hesitant fuzzy methods for prioritizing distributed stream processing frameworks for IoT applications. Math. Probl. Eng. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6655477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Liu, P.D.: Study on evaluation methods and application of enterprise informatization level based on fuzzy multi-attribute decision making. Doctoral Dissertation, Beijing Jiaotong University (2010)

  20. Liu, P.D., Cheng, S.F.: Interval-valued probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets for multi-criteria group decision-making. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 12(2), 1393–1411 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu, P.D., Li, Y.: Multi-attribute decision making method based on generalized MacLaurin symmetric mean aggregation operators for probabilistic linguistic information. Comput. Ind. Eng. 131, 282–294 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Liu, P.D., Li, Y.: An extended MULTIMOORA method for probabilistic linguistic multi-criteria group decision-making based on prospect theory. Comput. Ind. Eng. 136, 528–545 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mou, Q., Xu, Z.S., Liao, H.C.: An intuitionistic fuzzy multiplicative best–worst method for multi-criteria group decision making. Inf. Sci. 343, 224–239 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pamucar, D., Chatterjee, K., Zavadskas, E.K.: Assessment of third-party logistics provider using multi-criteria decision-making approach based on interval rough numbers. Comput. Ind. Eng. 127, 383–407 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rezaei, J.: Best–worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rodriguez, V., Montalvo, C.: Innovation policies from the European Union: methods for classification. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 27(6), 467–481 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Safarzadeh, S., Khansefid, S., Rasti-Barzoki, M.: A group multi-criteria decision-making based on best–worst method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 126, 111–121 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sofuoglu, M.A.: Development of an ITARA-based hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model for material selection. Soft Comput. 15(23), 6715–6725 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Song, H.F., Chen, Z.C.: Multi-attribute decision-making method based distance and COPRAS method with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy environment. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 14(1), 1229–1241 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Su, Z., Xu, Z.S., Zhao, H., Hao, Z.N., et al.: Entropy measures for probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information. IEEE Access 7, 65714–65727 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Torra, V.: Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25(6), 529–539 (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Tian, X.L., Niu, M.L., Ma, J.S., Xu, Z.S.: A novel TODIM with probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information and its application in green supplier selection. Complexity (2020). https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2540798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tversky, A.: Intransitivity of preferences. Psychol. Rev. 76(1), 31–48 (1969)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang, J.J., Ma, X.L., Xu, Z.S., Zhan, J.M.: Three-way multi-attribute decision making under hesitant fuzzy environments. Inf. Sci. 552, 328–351 (2020)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Wang, X.K., Zhang, H.Y., Wang, J.Q., Li, J.B., Li, L.: Extended TODIM-PROMETHEE II method with hesitant probabilistic information for solving potential risk evaluation problems of water resource carrying capacity. Expert Syst. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wei, G.W., Tang, Y.X., Zhao, M.W., Lin, R., Wu, J.: Selecting the low-carbon tourism destination: based on Pythagorean fuzzy taxonomy method. Mathematics 8(5), 832 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wei, G.W., Wang, H.J., Lin, R.: Application of correlation coefficient to interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making with incomplete weight information. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 2(26), 337–349 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wu, Z.B., Jamil, A., Xu, J.P.: A group decision making framework based on fuzzy VIKOR approach for machine tool selection with linguistic information. Appl. Soft Comput. 42, 314–324 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Xu, Z.S., Zhou, W.: Consensus building with a group of decision makers under the hesitant probabilistic fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 4(16), 481–503 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  41. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8(3), 338–353 (1965)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z.: A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision-making. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2(16), 159–172 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zhang, S., Xu, Z.S., He, Y.: Operations and integrations of probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information in decision making. Inf. Fusion 38, 1–11 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71771140), Project of cultural masters and “the four kinds of a batch” talents, the Special Funds of Taishan Scholars Project of Shandong Province (No. ts201511045), Major bidding projects of National Social Science Fund of China (No. 19ZDA080).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management Science and Engineering, Shandong University of Finance and Economics, Jinan, 250014, Shandong, China

    Peide Liu, Yifan Wu & Ying Li

Authors
  1. Peide Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yifan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ying Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peide Liu.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 16.

Table 16 The summary of the notations
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, P., Wu, Y. & Li, Y. Probabilistic Hesitant Fuzzy Taxonomy Method Based on Best–Worst-Method (BWM) and Indifference Threshold-Based Attribute Ratio Analysis (ITARA) for Multi-attributes Decision-Making. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 24, 1301–1317 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-021-01206-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-021-01206-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation