International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 954–962 | Cite as

A Novel Approach to Decision Analysis Using Dominance-Based Soft Rough Sets

  • Tanzeela ShaheenEmail author
  • Barkat Mian
  • Muhammad Shabir
  • Feng Feng


A number of useful mathematical tools such as fuzzy sets, rough sets and soft sets have been developed to deal with problems involving various uncertainties. These theories have been found to be particularly useful in decision making under uncertainty. This study develops the theory of dominance-based soft rough sets, which is used to propose a new method for analyzing conflicts in decision-making problems. The approach establishes a preference relation among the given objects subject to the available information, and based on this relation it approximates a given concept. The lower approximation is utilized to design an algorithm to handle problems involving both multi-attribute and multi-decision and preference. The algorithm aims at electing objects or actions based on their conditional attributes. The domain of conditional and decision attributes contains preference-ordered values. To achieve an optimal solution, we first collect alternatives (actions) graded as best by all the decision makers. We then use DBSR lower approximations to develop an algorithm to reach the optimal solution. This approach addresses some limitations of models based on Pawlak conflict analysis theory. There are two main contributions of this paper. One is a hybrid model based on rough and soft set theories that can handle preference-based domains. The other is a new approach that can handle multi-agent conflict analysis decision-making problems.


Soft sets Rough sets Soft rough sets Dominance-based rough sets 



This work was partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Program Nos. 51875457, 11301415), Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (Program No. 2018JM1054), Scientific Research Program Funded by Shaanxi Provincial Education Department of China (Program No. 16JK1696), and the Special Funds Project for Key Disciplines Construction of Shaanxi Universities.


  1. 1.
    Akram, M., Adeel, A., Alcantud, J.C.R.: Group decision-making methods based on hesitant N-soft sets. Expert Syst. Appl. 115, 95–105 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akram, M., Feng, F., Borumand Saeid, A., Leoreanu-Fotea, V.: A new multiple criteria decision-making method based on bipolar fuzzy soft graphs. Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 15(4), 73–92 (2018)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akram, M., Ali, G.: Hybrid models for decision-making based on rough Pythagorean fuzzy bipolar soft information. Granul. Comput. (2018). Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ali, M.I.: A note on soft sets, rough soft sets and fuzzy soft sets. Appl. Soft Comput. 11(4), 3329–3332 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Awang, M.I., Rose, A.N.M., Awang, M.K., Ahmad, F., Deris, M.M.: Multiple criteria preference relation by dominance relations in soft set theory. In: International Conference on Soft Computing and Data Mining, pp. 475–484. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cabrerizo, F.J., Herrera-Viedma, E., Pedrycz, W.: A method based on PSO and granular computing of linguistic information to solve group decision making problems defined in heterogeneous contexts. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 230(3), 624–633 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, H., Li, T., Luo, C., Hu, J.: Dominance-based neighborhood rough sets and its attribute reduction. In: International Conference on Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology, pp. 89–99. Springer, Cham (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deepa, N., Ganesan, K.: Multi-class classification using hybrid soft decision model for agriculture crop selection. Neural Comput. Appl. 30(4), 1025–1038 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deja, R.: Conflict analysis. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 17(2), 235–253 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feng, F., Li, C., Davvaz, B., Ali, M.I.: Soft sets combined with fuzzy sets and rough sets: a tentative approach. Soft Comput. 14(9), 899–911 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feng, F., Liu, X., Leoreanu-Fotea, V., Jun, Y.B.: Soft sets and soft rough sets. Inf. Sci. 181(6), 1125–1137 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowinski, R.: The use of rough sets and fuzzy sets in MCDM, chapter 14. In: Gal, T., Stewart, T., Hanne, T. (eds.) Advances in Multiple Criteria Decision Making, pp. 14.1–14.59. Kluwer, Boston (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowinski, R.: Rough approximation of a preference relation by dominance relations. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 117, 63–83 (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Slowinski, R.: Rough sets theory for multi-criteria decision analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 129, 1–47 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Slowinski, R.: Rough approximation by dominance relations. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 17, 153–171 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hu, Q., Yu, D., Guo, M.: Fuzzy preference based rough sets. Inf. Sci. 180(10), 2003–2022 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Li, Z., Xie, T.: The relationship among soft sets, soft rough sets and topologies. Soft Comput. 18(4), 717–728 (2014)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lin, G.P., Liang, J.Y., Qian, Y.H.: Topological approach to multigranulation rough sets. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 5(2), 233–243 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maji, P.K., Roy, A.R., Biswas, R.: An application of soft sets in a decision making problem. Comput. Math. Appl. 44, 1077–1083 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mi, J.-S., Leung, Y., Zhao, H.-Y., Feng, T.: Generalized fuzzy rough sets determined by a triangular norm. Inf. Sci. 178(16), 3203–3213 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Molodtsov, D.: Soft set theory first results. Comput. Math. Appl. 37, 19–31 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ouyang, Y., Wang, Z., Zhang, H.-P.: On fuzzy rough sets based on tolerance relations. Inf. Sci. 180(4), 532–542 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pawlak, Z.: Rough sets. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. 11, 341–356 (1982)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pawlak, Z.: An inquiry into anatomy of conflicts. J. Inf. Sci. 109, 65–68 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pawlak, Z.: Some remarks on conflict analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 166, 649–654 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pei, B., Zhao, S.Y., Chen, H., Zhou, X., Chen, D.J.: FARP: mining fuzzy association rules from a probabilistic quantitative database. Inf. Sci. 237, 242–260 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Qiong, B., Ruan, D., Shen, Y., Hermans, E., Janssens, D.: Improved hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS for road safety performance evaluation. Knowl.-Based Syst. 32, 84–90 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saaty, T., Alexander, J.: Conflict Resolution: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Praeger, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shabir, M., Ali, M.I., Shaheen, T.: Another approach to soft rough sets. Knowl.-Based Syst. 40, 72–80 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shabir, M., Shaheen, T.: A new methodology for fuzzification of rough sets based on \(\alpha\)-indiscernibility. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 312, 1–16 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sharkawy, A.B., El-Sharief, M.A.: Surface roughness prediction in end milling process using intelligent systems. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 5(1), 135–150 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Słowinski, R., Greco, S., Matarazzo, B.: Rough set analysis of preference-ordered data. In: Alpigini, J.J., Peters, J.F., Skowron, A., Zhong, N. (eds.) Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing, LNAI 2475, pp. 44–59. Springer, Berlin (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sun, B.Z., Ma, W.M., Zhao, H.Y.: Decision-theoretic rough fuzzy set model and application. Inf. Sci. 283, 180–196 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sun, B.Z., Ma, W.M.: Rough approximation of a preference relation by multi-decision dominance for a multi-agent conflict analysis problem. Inf. Sci. 315, 39–53 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yao, Y.Y.: Constructive and algebraic methods of the theory of rough sets. Inf. Sci. 109(1), 21–47 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yao, Y., Mi, J., Li, Z.: A novel variable precision \((\theta,\sigma )-\)fuzzy rough set model based on fuzzy granules. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 236, 58–72 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wu, W.-Z., Zhang, W.-X.: Neighborhood operator systems and approximations. Inf. Sci. 144(1), 201–217 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Xu, W., Zhang, X., Wang, Q., Sun, S.: On general binary relation based rough set. J. Inf. Comput. Sci. 7(1), 054–066 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zafar, F., Akram, M.: A novel decision-making method based on rough fuzzy information. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 20(3), 1000–1014 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhu, W.: Generalized rough sets based on relations. Inf. Sci. 177(22), 4997–5011 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tanzeela Shaheen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Barkat Mian
    • 2
  • Muhammad Shabir
    • 3
  • Feng Feng
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsAir UniversityIslamabadPakistan
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical SciencesLahore Leads UniversityLahorePakistan
  3. 3.Department of MathematicsQuaid-i-Azam UniversityIslamabadPakistan
  4. 4.School of Science, and Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Network Data Analysis and Intelligent ProcessingXi’an University of Posts and TelecommunicationsXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations