Advertisement

Multi-criteria group decision making based on ELECTRE I method in Pythagorean fuzzy information

  • Muhammad AkramEmail author
  • Farwa Ilyas
  • Harish Garg
Methodologies and Application

Abstract

ELECTRE is a family of multi-criteria decision analysis techniques which has the ability to provide as much as possible precise and suitable set of actions or alternatives to the underlying problem by eliminating the alternatives which are outranked by others. Group decision making is an effective process to provide the most appropriate solution to real-world decision-making scenarios by considering and merging the expert opinions of multiple individuals on problem. The purpose of this research study is to extend the ELECTRE I method to Pythagorean fuzzy ELECTRE I (PF-ELECTRE I) method in group decision-making environment, as Pythagorean fuzzy set model is more superior tool to capture vagueness and incompleteness in human evaluations. The developed method has ability to solve multi-criteria group decision-making problems in which the assessment information on available alternatives, provided by the experts, is presented as Pythagorean fuzzy decision matrices having each entry characterized by Pythagorean fuzzy number (PFN). The approach is formulated by introducing the concepts of strong, midrange and weak Pythagorean fuzzy concordance and discordance sets to elaborate the outranking relation among alternatives with respect to conflicting criteria. Framework of group decision supporting system based on PF-ELECTRE I is demonstrated by a flowchart. Finally, two illustrative examples in the field of health safety and environment management are given to verify and demonstrate the applicability of our proposed approach.

Keywords

Pythagorean fuzzy set Pythagorean fuzzy number ELECTRE method Outranking relation Concordance set Discordance set 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Aiello G, Enea M, Galante G (2006) A multi-objective approach to facility layout problem by genetic search algorithm and Electre method. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 22(5–6):447–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akram M, Ali G (2018) Hybrid models for decision-making based on rough Pythagorean fuzzy bipolar soft information. Granul Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s41066-018-0132-3 Google Scholar
  3. Akram M, Naz S (2018) Energy of Pythagorean fuzzy graphs with applications. Mathematics 6(8):136.  https://doi.org/10.3390/math6080136 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Akram M, Shumaiza Smarandache F (2018) Decision-making with bipolar neutrosophic TOPSIS and bipolar neutrosophic ELECTRE-I. Axioms 7(2):33.  https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms7020033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akram M, Habib A, Ilyas F, Dar JM (2018) Specific types of Pythagorean fuzzy graphs and application to decision-making. Math Comput Appl 23(3):42.  https://doi.org/10.3390/mca23030042 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. Akram M, Dar JM, Farooq A (2018) Planar graphs under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Mathematics 6(12):278.  https://doi.org/10.3390/math6120278 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Akram M, Ilyas F, Saeid AB (2019a) Certain notions of Pythagorean fuzzy graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst.  https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-181697 Google Scholar
  8. Akram M, Ilyas F, Dudek WA (2019b) Group decisionĄmaking based on pythagorean fuzzy TOPSIS method. Int J Intell Syst.  https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22103 Google Scholar
  9. Akram M, Dar JM, Naz S (2019c) Certain graphs under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Complex Intell Syst.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-018-0089-5 Google Scholar
  10. Akram M, Habib A, Davvaz B (2019d) Direct sum of n Pythagorean fuzzy graphs with application to group decision-making. J Multiple Valued Log Soft Comput (in press)Google Scholar
  11. Alghamdi MA, Alshehri NO, Akram M (2018) Multi-criteria decision-making methods in bipolar fuzzy environment. Int J Fuzzy Syst 20(6):2057–2064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Arkan E, Kalender ZTS, Vayvay Ö (2017) Solid waste disposal methodology selection using multi-criteria decision making methods and an application in Turkey. J Clean Prod 142:403–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Atanassov KT (1983) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. VII ITKR’s Session, Sofia, Deposed in Central Sci. - Techn. Library of Bulg. Acad. of Sci., 1697/84, (in Bulgarian)Google Scholar
  14. Aytac E, Kundaki N, Isik AT (2011) Fuzzy ELECTRE I method for evaluating catering firm alternatives. Ege Acad Rev 11:125–134Google Scholar
  15. Beccali M, Cellura M, Mistretta M (2003) Decision-making in energy planning. Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy technology. Renew Energy 28(13):2063–2087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Benayoun R, Roy B, Sussman B (1966) ELECTRE: Une méthode pour guider le choix en présence de points de vue multiples. Note de travail 49, SEMA-METRA international, direction scientifiqueGoogle Scholar
  17. Botti L, Peypoch N (2013) Multi-criteria ELECTRE method and destination competitiveness. Tour Manag Perspect 6:108–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brans JP, Vinvke P, Mareschal B (1986) How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. Eur J Oper Res 24:228–238MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Chen TY (2014) An ELECTRE-based outranking method for multiple criteria group decision making using interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 263:1–21MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. de Almeida AT (2007) Multicriteria decision model for outsourcing contracts selection based on utility function and ELECTRE method. Comput Oper Res 34(12):3569–3574CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Figueira JR, Mousseau V, Roy B (2005) ELECTRE methods. In: Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: the state of the art surveys. Springer, New York, pp 133–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Garg H (2016) A novel correlation coefficients between Pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications to decision-making processes. Int J Intell Syst Wiley 31(12):1234–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garg H (2018) Linguistic Pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications in multi attribute decision making process. Int J Intell Syst Wiley 33(6):1234–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garg H (2018) Hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy sets and their aggregation operators in multiple-attribute decision-making. Int J Uncertain Quantif 8(3):267–289MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hajeeh M, AI-Othman A (2005) Application of the analytical hierarchy process in the selection of desalination plants. Desalination 174:97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Krylovas A (2014) New KEMIRA method for determining criteria priority and weights in solving MCDM problem. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 13:1119–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Naz S, Ashraf S, Akram M (2018) A novel approach to decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy information. Mathematics 6(6):95.  https://doi.org/10.3390/math6060095 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156(2):445–455CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Peng X, Selvachandran G (2017) Pythagorean fuzzy set: state of the art and future directions. Artif Intell Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-017-9596-9 Google Scholar
  31. Peng XD, Yang Y (2015) Some results for Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 30(11):1133–1160MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Peng X, Yang Y (2016) Fundamental properties of interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators. Int J Intell Syst 31:444–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peng JJ, Wang JQ, Zhang HY, Chen XH (2014) An outranking approach for multi-criteria decision-making problems with simplified neutrosophic sets. Appl Soft Comput 25:336–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pramanik T, Samanta S, Sarkar B, Pal M (2016) Fuzzy \(\phi \)-tolerance competition graphs. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-2026-5 zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Ren PJ, Xu ZS, Gou XJ (2016) Pythagorean fuzzy TODIM approach to multicriteria decision making. Appl Soft Comput 42:246–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rogers M, Bruen M (1998) Choosing realistic values of indifference, preference and veto thresholds for use with environmental criteria within ELECTRE. Eur J Oper Res 107(3):542–551CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. Roy B (1968) Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). RIRO 8:57–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singh PK, Kumar AC, Li J (2016) Knowledge representation using interval-valued fuzzy formal concept lattice. Soft Comput 20(4):1485–1502CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Vahdani B, Hadipour H (2011) Extension of the ELECTRE method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Soft Comput 15(3):569–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vahdani B, Mousavi SM, Moghaddam RT, Hashemi H (2013) A new design of the elimination and choice translating reality method for multi-criteria group decision-making in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Appl Math Model 37:1781–1799MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Wu MC, Chen TY (2011) The ELECTRE multicriteria analysis approach based on Atanssov’s intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Expert Syst Appl 38:12318–12327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yager RR (2013) Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In: Proceedings of the Joint IFSA world congress and NAFIPS annual meeting, Edmonton, Canada, pp 57-61Google Scholar
  43. Yager RR, Abbasov AM (2013) Pythagorean membership grades, complex numbers, and decision making. Int J Intell Syst 28(5):436–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhan J, Masood H, Akram M (2018a) Novel decision-making algorithms based on intuitionistic fuzzy rough environment. Int J Mach Learn Cybern.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-018-0827-4 Google Scholar
  46. Zhan J, Akram M, Sitara M (2018b) Novel decision-making method based on bipolar neutrosophic information. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3552-8 Google Scholar
  47. Zhang X (2016) A novel approach based on similarity measure for pythagorean fuzzy multiple criteria group decision making. Int J Intell Syst 31(6):593–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang X, Xu Z (2014) Extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 29(12):1061–1078MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of the PunjabLahorePakistan
  2. 2.School of MathematicsThapar Institute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed University)PatialaIndia

Personalised recommendations