##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 6, 2018
Eda Bolturk Cengiz Kahraman

Abstract

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most widely used methods in multi criteria decision making (MCDM) in many areas. The method has been extended with hesitant fuzzy sets, intuitionistic fuzzy sets, neutrosophic sets, and type -2 fuzzy sets etc. These extended methods can consider the vagueness in decision making problems through different definitions of membership functions. Each of them tries to increase the effectiveness of AHP under uncertainty. Decision makers can fully express their judgments through neutrosophic sets (NS) since NS are based on three independent parameters, truthiness (T), indeterminancy (I) and falsity (F), providing a distinction between a ‘relative truth’ and an ‘absolute truth’. In this paper, we employ the possibility degree method for ranking interval numbers in our neutrosophic AHP approach by utilizing NS’ representation power. Besides, we employ interval-valued NS since a larger domain for the definition of T, I, and F is provided. Pairwise comparison matrices can be filled in by using linguistic terms such as weakly more important, moderately more important or extremely important. Then, we obtain the relative importance degrees of criteria by using the possibility degree method. In order to show the effectiveness of our method, a MCDM application is given in energy planning. Comparative and sensitivity analyses are also presented in the paper.


 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

multi criteria decision making, energy, interval-valued neutrosophic sets, possibility degree method, AHP

References
Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Sangaiah AK (2017a) Neutrosophic AHP-Delphi group decision making model based on trapezoidal neutrosophic numbers. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 9(5), 1-17. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-017-0548-7

Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., & Smarandache, F. (2018a). An extension of neutrosophic AHP-SWOT analysis for strategic planning and decision-making. Symmetry, 10(4.) Doi:10.3390/sym10040116.

Abdel-Basset, M., Manogaran, G., & Mohamed, M. (2018b). Internet of things (IoT) and its impact on supply chain: A framework for building smart, secure and efficient systems. Future Generation Computer Systems, 86, 614-628. Doi:10.1016/j.future.2018.04.051

Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., Zhou, Y., & Hezam, I. (2017b). Multi-criteria group decision making based on neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 33(6), 4055-4066. Doi:10.3233/JIFS-17981.

Abdullah L, Najib L (2016). Integration of interval Type-2 fuzzy sets and analytic hierarchy process: Implication to computational procedures. AIP Conference Proceedings 1750(1), 020019 Doi: 10.1063/1.4954532.

Atanassov KT (1983) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. VII ITKR’s Session, Sofia.

Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2014). A new methodology for neutrosophic multi-attribute decision making with unknown weight information. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 3, 42-50.

Bolturk, E., Kahraman, C. (2018) A novel interval-valued neutrosophic AHP with cosine similarity measure. Soft Computing, 22(15), 4941-4958. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3140-y

Buckley, J.J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 34, 187-195.

Buyukozkan G, Feyzioglu O, Gocer F (2016). Evaluation of hospital web services using intuitionistic fuzzy AHP and intuitionistic fuzzy VIKOR. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2016, 607-611. Doi: 10.1109/IEEM.2016.7797947

Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 649-655. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00300-2

Deepika M, Kannan ASK (2016). Global supplier selection using intuitionistic fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, and Optimization Techniques, ICEEOT 2016, 2390. Doi: 10.1109/ICEEOT.2016.7755122

Erdogan M, Kaya I (2016) Evaluating alternative-fuel busses for public transportation in Istanbul using interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS. Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing, 26(6), 625-642.

Ilbahar, E., Kara?an, A., Cebi, S., & Kahraman, C. (2018). A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Science, 103, 124-136. Doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.025.

Kahraman C, Bolturk E, Onar SC, Oztaysi B, Goztepe K (2016). Multi-attribute warehouse location selection in humanitarian logistics using hesitant fuzzy AHP. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 8(2), 271-298. Doi: https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v8i2.387

Kahraman, C., Öztay?i, B., Sar?, ?.U., Turano?lu, E. (2014) Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process with interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Knowledge-Based Systems, 59, 48-57. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.02.001

Lee, H-C., Chang, C-T. (2018). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan,. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 92, 883-896. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.007

Li Y, Wang Y, Liu P (2016). Multiple attribute group decision-making methods based on trapezoidal fuzzy two-dimension linguistic power generalized aggregation operators. Soft Computing, 20(7), 2689-2704. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-1668-7

Oztaysi B, Onar SC, Bolturk E, Kahraman C (2015). Hesitant fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems,1-7. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2015.7337948

Radwan NM, Senousy MB, Riad AEDM (2016). Neutrosophic AHP Multi Criteria Decision Making Method applied on the selection of learning management system.
International Journal of Advancements in Computing Technology (IJACT), 8(5), 95-105. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12170

Rivieccio U., (2008). Neutrosophic logics: prospects and problems. Fuzzy Sets Systems 159(14), 1860–1868. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2007.11.011

Senvar OA (2018). Systematic customer oriented approach based on hesitant fuzzy AHP for performance assessments of service departments. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 643,289-300. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66827-7_26

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

Smarandache, F. (1995). Neutrosophic logic and set, mss., http://fs.gallup.unm.edu/neutrosophy.htm

Torra V (2010). Hesitant fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 25,529–539. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20418

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

Wu, J., Huang. H., & Cao, Q. (2013). Research on AHP with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and its application in multi-criteria decision making problems. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 37(24), 9898-9906. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.035

Van Laarhoven, P. J. M., & Pedrycz, W. (1983). A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11(1-3), 229-241. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(83)80082-7

Zeng, J., An, M., & Smith, N. J. (2007). Application of a fuzzy based decision making methodology to construction project risk assessment. International Journal of Project Management, 25(6), 589-600. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.02.006

Zhang HY, Wang JQ, Chen, XH (2014). Interval neutrosophic sets and their application in multicriteria decision-making problems. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, 15. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/645953

Zhu B, Xu Z, Zhang R, Hong M (2016). Hesitant analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 250(2),602-614. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.063
Section
Special Topic Articles