Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Incorporating a new perspective of Z-number into ELECTRE II with group consensus involving reliance degree and prospect theory

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Z-number expresses the membership degrees of an element to a set by several possibilities and their reliability. Therefore, it has a great advantage in dealing with fuzziness and uncertainty especially for multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM). In this paper, a novel approach, named HFLT-Z-h-ELECTRE II which incorporates Z-number into ELECTRE II is proposed to handle divergent views of group members and vague information. Specifically, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set (HFLTS) helps experts to express evaluations about membership degrees. And a developed group consensus model enriched by reliance degree and cumulative prospect theory for further consideration is equipped for expert weights which replace the second part of Z-number in a brand-new perspective. Additionally, a corresponding average support degree function which is beneficial to comparing each pair of criteria is proposed. An application example about sustainable construction material suppliers selection is operated for experiment to show application and practicality of the proposal. Afterwards, further comparative analysis and sensitivity analysis are conducted to explore the impacts of parameters and discuss the merits of our proposal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Zou WC, Wan SP, Chen SM (2022) A fairness-concern-based LINMAP method for heterogeneous multi-criteria group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic truth degrees. Inform Sci 612:1206–1225

    Google Scholar 

  2. Labella A, Dutta B, Martinez L (2021) An optimal Best-Worst prioritization method under a 2-tuple linguistic environment in decision making. Comput Ind Eng 155:107141

    Google Scholar 

  3. Liu S, He XJ, Chan FTS, Wang ZY (2022) An extended multi-criteria group decision-making method with psychological factors and bidirectional influence relation for emergency medical supplier selection. Expert Syst Appl 202:117414

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wu ZB, Ma N, Zeng ZQ, Xu JP (2019) Integer programming models to manage consensus for uncertain MCGDM based on PSO algorithms. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 27:888–902

    Google Scholar 

  5. Herrera-Viedma E, Palomares I, Li CC, Cabrerizo FJ, Dong YC, Chiclana F, Herrera F (2021) Revisiting fuzzy and linguistic decision making:scenarios and challenges for making wiser decisions in a better way. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 51:191-208

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang SL, Li X, Meng FY (2022) A distance measure based intuitionistic triangular fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making method and its application. Appl Intell. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-04009-x

  7. Wang XY, Wang H, Xu ZS, Ren ZL (2022) Green supplier selection based on probabilistic dual hesitant fuzzy sets: A process integrating best worst method and superiority and inferiority ranking. Appl Intell 52:8279–8301

    Google Scholar 

  8. Liu YY, Rodriguez RM, Qin JD, Martinez L (2022) Type-2 fuzzy envelope of extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set: Application to multi-criteria group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 169:108208

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

  10. Chen L, Pan W (2021) Review fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making in construction management using a network approach. Appl Soft Comput 102:107103

  11. Torra V (2010) Hesitant Fuzzy Sets. Int J Intell Syst 25:529–539

  12. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning-Part I. Inform Sci 8:199–249

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning-Part II. Inform Sci 8:301–357

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Xian SD, Guo HL (2019) Novel supplier grading approach based on interval probability hesitant fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS. Eng Appl Artif Intel 87:103299

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rodriguez RM, Martnez L, Herrera F (2012) Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20:109–119

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhou YY, Zheng CL, Zhou LG, Chen HY (2022) Selection of a solar water heater for large-scale group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations based on the best-worst method. Appl Intell 52:4940–4960

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gundogdu FK (2022) Analyzing critical barriers of smart energy city in Turkey based ontwo-dimensional uncertainty by hesitant z-fuzzy linguistic terms. Eng Appl Artif Intel 113:104935

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zadeh LA (2011) A note on Z-numbers. Inform Sci 181:2923–2932

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kang BY, Deng Y, Sadiq R (2018) Total utility of Z-number. Appl Intell 48:703–729

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tao ZH, Liu X, Chen HY, Liu JP, Guan F (2019) Linguistic Z-number fuzzy soft sets and its application on multiple attribute group decision making problems. Int J Intell Syst 35:105-124

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jiang W, Cao Y, Deng XY (2020) A Novel Z-Network Model Based on Bayesian Network and Z-Number. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 28:1585–1599

    Google Scholar 

  22. Xian SD, Liu RP, Yang ZJ, Li X (2022) Intuitionistic principal value Z linguistic hybrid geometric operator and their applications for multi-attribute group decision-making. Artif Intell Rev 55:3863–3896

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ji Y, Li HH, Zhang HJ (2022) Risk-averse two-stage stochastic minimum cost consensus models with asymmetric adjustment cost. Group Decis Negot 31:261–291

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yang YL, Gai TT, Cao MS, Zhang Z, Zhang HJ, Wu J (2023) Application of group decision making in shipping industry 4.0: bibliometric analysis, trends, and future directions. Syst 11:69

  25. Li ZL, Zhang Z, Yu WY (2023) Consensus reaching for ordinal classification-based group decision making with heterogeneous preference information. J Oper Res Soc. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2023.2186806

  26. Li ZL, Zhang Z, Yu WY (2022) Consensus reaching with consistency control in group decision making with incomplete hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations. Comput Ind Eng 170:108311

  27. Li CC, Dong YC, Liang HM, Pedrycz W, Herrera F (2022) Data-driven method to learning personalized individual semantics to support linguistic multi-attribute decision making. Omega Int J Manage S 111:102642

  28. Dong QX, Sheng Q, Martinez L, Zhang Z (2022) An adaptive group decision making framework: Individual and local world opinion based opinion dynamics. Inf Fusion 78:218–231

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wu J, Wang S, Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E (2022) Twofold personalized feedback mechanism for social network consensus by uninorm interval trust propagation. IEEE Trans Cybern 52:11081–11092

    Google Scholar 

  30. Xing YM, Wu J, Chiclana F, Yu GF, Cao MS, Herrera-Viedma E (2023) A bargaining game based feedback mechanism to support consensus in dynamic social network group decision making. Inf Fusion 93:363–382

    Google Scholar 

  31. Wei JP, Qu SJ, Wang QH, Luan DQ, Zhao XH (2022) The Novel Data-Driven Robust maximum expert mixed integer consensus models under multirole’s opinions uncertainty by considering noncooperators. IEEE Trans Comput Soc Syst. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2022.3192897

  32. Qu SJ, Shu LL, Yan JY (2022) Optimal pricing and service level in supply chain considering misreport behavior and fairness concern. Comput Ind Eng 174:108759

  33. Qu SJ, Xu L, Mangla SK, Chan FTS, Zhu JL, Arisian S (2022) Matchmaking in reward-based crowdfunding platforms: a hybrid machine learning approach. Int J Prod Res 60:7551–7571

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pinyol I, Sabater-Mir J (2013) Computational trust and reputation models for open multi-agent systems: a review. Artif Intell Rev 40:1–25

    Google Scholar 

  35. Xu X, Zhang Q, Chen X (2020) Consensus-based non-cooperative behaviors management in large-group emergency decision-making considering experts’ trust relations and preference risks. Knowl Based Syst 190:105108

  36. Tian ZP, Nie RX, Wang JQ (2019) Social network analysis-based consensus-supporting framework for large-scale group decision-making with incomplete interval type-2 fuzzy information. Inform Sci 502:446–471

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–292

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5:297–323

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang XT, Triantaphyllou E (2008) Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega Int J Manage S 36:45–63

    Google Scholar 

  40. Deveci M, Demirel N, John R, Öecan E (2015) Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 27:692–705

    Google Scholar 

  41. Mir MSS, Afzalirad M, Ghorbanzadeh M (2021) A robust fuzzy hybrid MCDM ranking method for optimal selection of lithium extraction process from brine and seawater. Miner Eng 169:106957

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zahid K, Akram M, Kahraman C (2022) A new ELECTRE-based method for group decision-making with complex spherical fuzzy information. Knowl Based Syst 243:108525

  43. Akram M, Luqman A, Kahraman C (2021) Hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy ELECTRE-II method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Appl Soft Comput 108:107479

  44. Liu H, Ma Y, Jiang L (2019) Managing incomplete preferences and consistency improvement in hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations with applications in group decision making. Inform Fusion 51:19–29

    Google Scholar 

  45. Rong LL, Wang L, Liu PD (2021) Supermarket fresh food suppliers evaluation and selection with multigranularity unbalanced hesitant fuzzy linguistic information based on prospect theory and evidential theory. Int J Intell Syst 37:1931–1971

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wang TX, Li HX, Zhou XZ, Liu D, Huang B (2021) Three-way decision based on third-generation prospect theory with Z-numbers. Inform Sci 569:13–38

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  47. Akram M, Adeel A, Al-Kenani AN, Alcantud JCR (2021) Hesitant fuzzy N-soft ELECTRE-II model: A new framework for decision-making. Neural Comput Appl 33:7505–7520

    Google Scholar 

  48. Liu ZM, Bi YW, Wang XY, Sha LB, Liu PD (2022) A generalized TODIM-ELECTRE II method based on linguistic Z-numbers and Dempster-Shafer evidence theory with unknown weight information. Comput Ind Eng 8:949–971

    Google Scholar 

  49. Liu ZM, Wang WX, Wang D, Liu PD (2022) A modified ELECTRE II method with double attitude parameters based on linguistic Z-number and its application for third-party reverse logistics provider selection. Appl Intell 52:14964–14987

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ren Z, Liao H, Liu Y (2020) Generalized Z-numbers with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information and its application to medicine selection for the patients with mild symptoms of the COVID-19. Comput Ind Eng 145:106517

  51. Karaşan A, Kaya İ, Erdoǧan M, Çolak M (2021) A multicriteria decision making methodology based on two-dimensional uncertainty by hesitant Z-fuzzy linguistic terms with an application for blockchain risk evaluation. Appl Soft Comput 113:108014

  52. Li Z, Zhang Q, Liao H (2019) Efficient-equitable-ecological evaluation of regional water resource coordination considering both visible and virtual water. Omega Int J Manage S 83:223–235

    Google Scholar 

  53. Tu Y, Wang HY, Zhou XY, Shen WJ, Lev B (2021) Comprehensive evaluation of security, equity, and efficiency on regional water resources coordination using a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method with different hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. J Clean Prod 310:127447

    Google Scholar 

  54. Chen N, Xu ZS (2015) Hesitant fuzzy ELECTRE II approach: A new way to handle multi-criteria decision making problems. Inform Sci 292:175–197

    Google Scholar 

  55. Liu Y, Eckert CM, Earl C (2020) A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Syst Appl 161:113738

  56. Jiskani IM, Yasli F, Hosseini S, Rehman AU, Uddin S (2022) Improved Z-number based fuzzy fault tree approach to analyze health and safety risks in surface mines. Resour Policy 76:102591

  57. Duckstein L, Gershon M (1983) Multicriterion analysis of a vegetation management problem using ELECTRE II. Appl Math Model 7:254–261

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  58. Hokkanen J, Salminen P, Rossi E, Ettala M (1995) The choice of a solid waste management system using the ELECTRE II decision-aid method. Waste Manag Res 13:175–193

    Google Scholar 

  59. Stević Ž, Pamučar D, Puška A, Chatterjee P (2020) Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: Measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS). Comput Ind Eng 140:106231

  60. Bai CG, Sarkis J (2010) Sustainable supplier development: analytical evaluation using rough set theory. J Clean Prod 18:1200–1210

  61. Wen TC, Chang KH, Lai HH (2019) Integrating the 2-tuple linguistic representation and soft set to solve supplier selection problems with incomplete information. Eng Appl Artif Intell 87:103248

  62. Gao HX, Ju YB, Gonzalez EDRS, Zhang WK (2020) Sustainable supplier selection in electronics manufacturing: an approach based on consensus decision making. J Clean Prod 245:118781

  63. Lu ZM, Sun XK, Wang YX, Xu CB (2019) Sustainable supplier selection in straw biomass industry based on cloud model and possibility degree. J Clean Prod 209:995–1005

    Google Scholar 

  64. Yu CX, Shao YF, Wang K, Zhang LP (2019) A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Expert Syst Appl 121:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kannan D, Mina H, Nosrati-Abarghooee S, Khosrojerdi G (2020) Sustainable circular supplier selection: A novel hybrid approach. Sci Total Environ 722:137936

  66. Gülçin B, Gizem Ç (2012) A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate sustainable suppliers. Expert Syst Appl 39:3000–3011

    Google Scholar 

  67. Yeh WC, Chuang MC (2011) Using multi-objective genetic algorithm for partner selection in sustainable supply chain problems. Expert Syst Appl 38:4244–4253

    Google Scholar 

  68. Jia R, Liu Y, Bai X (2020) Sustainable supplier selection and order allocation: Distributionally robust goal programming model and tractable approximation. Comput Ind Eng 140:106267

  69. Lee AHI, Kang HY, Hsu CF, Hung HC (2009) A sustainable supplier selection model for hightech industry. Expert Syst Appl 36:7917–7927

    Google Scholar 

  70. Rao P, Holt D (2005) Do sustainable supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance? Int J Oper Prod Man 25:898–916

    Google Scholar 

  71. Zhu QH, Sarkis J (2007) The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent sustainable supply chain practices and performance. Int J Prod Res 45:4333–4355

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  72. Darko A, Chan APC (2017) Review of barriers to green building adoption. Sustain Dev 25(3):167–179

    Google Scholar 

  73. Wang L, Zhang P, Ma L, Gong XH, Skibniewski MJ (2020) Developing a corporate social responsibility framework for sustainable construction using pratial least squares structural equation modeling. Technol Econ Dev Econ 26:186–212

    Google Scholar 

  74. Liu ZM, Wang WX, Di W, Liu PD (2022) A modified ELECTRE II method with double attitude parameters based on linguistic Z-number and its application for third-party reverse logistics provider selection. Appl Intell 52:14964–14987

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 71801177), the Humanities and Social Sciences Fund of Ministry of Education of China (grant number 18YJC630163).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Safety Science and Emergency Management, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, 430070, China

    Yan Tu & Renpeng Zhou

  2. The School of Management, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, 710049, China

    Xiaoyang Zhou

  3. Decision Sciences Department, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Benjamin Lev

Authors
  1. Yan Tu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Renpeng Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaoyang Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Benjamin Lev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Yan Tu: Conceptualization, Supervision. Renpeng Zhou: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing - original draft. Xiaoyang Zhou: Methodology, Writing - review & editing. Benjamin Lev: Writing - review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yan Tu.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have 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

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tu, Y., Zhou, R., Zhou, X. et al. Incorporating a new perspective of Z-number into ELECTRE II with group consensus involving reliance degree and prospect theory. Appl Intell 53, 23316–23335 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-023-04757-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-023-04757-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation