A modified TOPSIS method based on vague parameterized vague soft sets and its application to supplier selection problems
- 170 Downloads
In this paper, we propose an intuitively straightforward extension of the vague soft set model called the vague parameterized vague soft set (vp-VSS). This model generalizes the vague soft set by including the opinions of an expert or a moderator regarding the values of the membership function for the parameters that are considered, in the form of a vague set. The values provided by the experts indicate the threshold values for the membership functions of the elements, i.e., the minimum values that must be ideally satisfied by all the elements for each parameter. This provides a clear indication to the users of these information, and forms a pertinent component of the model, particularly in the decision-making process. Subsequently, we define some operations for this model and examine its properties. Subsequently, we introduce two algorithms based on a modified TOPSIS approach and a weighted aggregation operator approach, both of which are based on our proposed vp-VSS model. These algorithms are then applied in two multi-attribute decision-making problems involving supplier selection and the evaluation of supplier performance. The performance and utility of these algorithms are compared and contrasted in terms of the computational complexity and discriminative power of the algorithms.
KeywordsVague soft set TOPSIS Aggregation operator Supplier selection
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the anonymous reviewers, the editor in charge of this paper, and the Editor-in-Chief for their constructive comments which has helped to improve the quality of this paper. In addition, the first author Ganeshsree Selvachandran would like to gratefully acknowledge the financial assistance received from the Ministry of Education, Malaysia, under Grant No. FRGS/1/2017/STG06/UCSI/03/1 and UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, under Grant No. Proj-In-FOBIS-014.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 8.Deli I, Cagman N (2015) Intuitionistic fuzzy parameterized soft set theory and its decision making. Appl Soft Comput 28:109–113Google Scholar
- 11.Mayyas A, Omar MA, Hayajneh MT (2016) Eco-material selection using fuzzy TOPSIS method. Int J Sustain Eng 9(5):292–304Google Scholar
- 12.Solanki R, Gulati G, Tiwari A, Lohani QMD (2016) A correlation based intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method on supplier selection problem. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE), Vancouver, Canada. http://doi.org/10.1109/CCDC.2010.5499018
- 13.Eraslan S, Cagman N (2017) A decision making method by combining TOPSIS and grey relation method under fuzzy soft sets. Sigma J Eng Nat Sci 8(1):53–64Google Scholar
- 15.Ren F, Kong M, Pei Z (2017) A new hesitant fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS method for group multi-criteria linguistic decision making. Symmetry 9(289):1–19Google Scholar
- 16.Onat NC, Gumus S, Kucukvar M, Tatari O (2016) Application of the TOPSIS and intuitionistic fuzzy approaches for ranking the life cycle sustainability performance of alternative vehicle technologies. Sustain Prod Consum 6:12–25Google Scholar
- 19.Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2016) TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput Appl 27(3):727–737Google Scholar
- 20.Buyukozkan G, Guleryuz S (2016) Multi-criteria group decision making approach for smart phone selection using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Int J Comput Intell Syst 9(4):709–725Google Scholar
- 21.Yang W, Chen Z, Zhang F (2017) New group decision making method in intuitionistic fuzzy setting based on TOPSIS. Technol Econ Dev Econ 23(3):441–461Google Scholar
- 28.Shaw K, Shankar R, Yadav SS, Thakur LS (2012) Supplier selection using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy multi-objective linear programming for developing low carbon supply chain. Expert Syst Appl 39(9):8182–8192Google Scholar
- 29.Rouyendegh BD, Saputro TE (2014) Supplier selection using fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP: a case study. Proc Soc Behav Sci 116:3957–3970Google Scholar
- 30.Dargi A, Anjomshoae A, Galankashi MR, Memari A, Tap MBM (2014) Supplier selection: a fuzzy-ANP approach. Proc Comput Sci 31:691–700Google Scholar
- 32.Kaur P, Rachana KNL (2016) An intuitionistic fuzzy optimization approach to vendor selection problem. Perspect Sci 8:348–350Google Scholar
- 33.Dweiri F, Kumar S, Khan SA, Jain V (2016) Designing an integrated AHP based decision support system for supplier selection in automotive industry. Expert Syst Appl 62:273–283Google Scholar
- 34.Junior FRL, Osiro L, Carpinetti LCR (2014) A comparison between fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods to supplier selection. Appl Soft Comput 21:194–209Google Scholar
- 35.Wang YM (1997) Using the method of maximizing deviations to make decision for multiindices. Syst Eng Electron 8:21–26Google Scholar
- 43.Zhang XH (2014) On interval soft sets with applications. Int J Comput Intell Syst 7:186–196Google Scholar
- 44.Chetia B, Das PK (2011) Application of vague soft sets in students’ evaluation. Adv Appl Sci Res 2(6):418–423Google Scholar
- 46.Yager RR (2013) Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In: Proceedings of the Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting, Edmonton, Canada, pp 57–61Google Scholar
- 47.Yager RR, Abbasov AM (2013) Pythagorean membership grades, complex numbers and decision making. Int J Intell Syst 28:436–452Google Scholar
- 48.Cuong BC (2013) Picture fuzzy sets—first results, Part 1. Seminar “Neuro-fuzzy systems with applications”, Preprint 03/2013, Institute of Mathematics, HanoiGoogle Scholar
- 49.Cuong BC (2013) Picture fuzzy sets—first results, Part 2. Seminar “Neuro-fuzzy systems with applications”, Preprint 04/2013, Institute of Mathematics, HanoiGoogle Scholar
- 50.Cuong BC (2014) Picture fuzzy sets. J Comput Sci Cybern 30(4):409–420Google Scholar