Neural Computing and Applications

, Volume 29, Issue 10, pp 939–954 | Cite as

Approaches to single-valued neutrosophic MADM based on MABAC, TOPSIS and new similarity measure with score function

  • Xindong Peng
  • Jingguo Dai
Original Article


In this paper, we initiate a new axiomatic definition of single-valued neutrosophic distance measure and similarity measure, which is expressed by single-valued neutrosophic number that will reduce the information loss and remain more original information. Meanwhile, a novel score function is proposed. Then, the objective weights of various attributes are determined via gray system theory. Moreover, we present the combined weights, which can show both the subjective information and the objective information. Later, we present three algorithms to deal with multi-attribute decision-making problem based on revised Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution, Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison and similarity measure. Finally, the effectiveness and feasibility of approaches are demonstrated by two numerical examples.


Similarity measure SVNN Score function Combined weighed TOPSIS MABAC 



The authors are very appreciative to the reviewers for their precious comments which enormously ameliorated the quality of this paper. Our work is sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 61163036).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no any competing financial, professional, or personal interests from other parties.


  1. 1.
    Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:87–96CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–356CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alcantud JC (2016) Some formal relationships among soft sets, fuzzy sets, and their extensions. Int J Approx Reason 68:45–53MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bustince H, Barrenechea E, Fernandez J, Pagola M, Montero J (2015) The origin of fuzzy extensions. Springer handbook of computational intelligence. Springer, Berlin, pp 89–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bustince H, Burillo P (1996) Vague sets are intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 79:403–405MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gau WL, Buehrer DJ (1993) Vague sets. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cyber 23:610–614CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smarandache F (1999) A unifying field in logics: neutrosophy, neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, RehobothzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Turksen I (1986) Interval valued fuzzy sets based on normal forms. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:191–210MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Atanassov KT, Gargov G (1989) Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 31:343–349MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 4:410–413zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ye J (2013) Multicriteria decision-making method using the correlation coefficient under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Int J Gen Syst 42:386–394MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ye J (2014) Improved correlation coefficients of single valued neutrosophic sets and interval neutrosophic sets for multiple attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzz Syst 27:2453–2462zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ye J (2014) Clustering methods using distance-based similarity measures of single-valued neutrosophic sets. J Int Syst 23:379–389Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ye J (2014) Multiple attribute group decision-making method with completely unknown weights based on similarity measures under single valued neutrosophic environment. J Intell Fuzz Syst 27:2927–2935MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ye J (2015) Single-valued neutrosophic similarity measures based on cotangent function and their application in the fault diagnosis of steam turbine. Soft Comput. doi: 10.1007/s00500-015-1818-y zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ye J (2014) Single valued neutrosophic cross-entropy for multicriteria decision making problems. Appl Math Model 38:1170–1175MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ye J (2015) Improved cross entropy measures of single valued neutrosophic sets and interval neutrosophic sets and their multicriteria decision making methods. Cyber Inf Technol 15:13–26MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2016) TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput Appl 27:727–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sahin R, Kucuk A (2015) Subsethood measure for single valued neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzz Syst 29:525–530CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang HL, Guo ZL, She YH, Liao XW (2016) On single valued neutrosophic relations. J Intell Fuzz Syst 30:1045–1056CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Huang HL (2016) New distance measure of single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application. Int J Intell Syst. doi: 10.1002/int.21815 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu PD (2016) The aggregation operators based on archimedean t-Conorm and t-Norm for single-valued neutrosophic numbers and their application to decision making. Int J Fuzzy Syst. doi: 10.1007/s40815-016-0195-8 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li YH, Liu PD, Chen YB (2016) Some single valued neutrosophic number Heronian mean operators and their application in multiple attribute group decision making. Informatica 27:85–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pramanik S, Biswas P, Giri BC (2016) Hybrid vector similarity measures and their applications to multi-attribute decision making under neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput Appl. doi: 10.1007/s00521-015-2125-3 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zavadskas EK, Bausys R, Lazauskas M (2015) Sustainable assessment of alternative sites for the construction of a waste incineration plant by applying WASPAS method with single-valued neutrosophic set. Sustainability 7:15923–15936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bausys R, Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A (2015) Application of neutrosophic set to muticriteria decision making by COPRAS. Econ Comput Econ Cybern Stud Res 49:91–106Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chatterjee R, Majumdar P, Samanta SK (2016) On some similarity measures and entropy on quadripartitioned single valued neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzz Syst 30:2475–2485CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ye J, Fu J (2016) Multi-period medical diagnosis method using a single valued neutrosophic similarity measure based on tangent function. Comput Method Prog Bio 123:142–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    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
  30. 30.
    Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25:529–539zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zadeh LA (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Inf Sci 8:199–249MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ye J (2014) Multiple-attribute decision-making method under a single-valued neutrosophic Hesitant fuzzy environment. J Intell Syst 24:23–36Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ye J (2015) An extended TOPSIS method for multiple attribute group decision making based on single valued neutrosophic linguistic numbers. J Intell Fuzz Syst 28:247–255MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pamucar D, Cirovic G (2015) The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC). Expert Syst Appl 42:3016–3028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yager RR, Abbasov AM (2013) Pythagorean membership grades, complex numbers, and decision making. Int J Intell Syst 28:436–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Peng XD, Yang Y (2015) Some results for pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 30:1133–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Peng XD, Yang Y (2016) Pythagorean fuzzy choquet integral based MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Intell Syst. doi: 10.1002/int.21814 Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Xue YX, You JX, Lai XD, Liu HC (2016) An interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy MABAC approach for material selection with incomplete weight information. Appl Soft Comput 38:703–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hadi-Venchen A, Mirjaberi M (2014) Fuzzy inferior ratio method for multiple attribute decision making problems. Inf Sci 277:263–272MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Liu SF, Dang YG, Fang ZG (2000) Grey systems theory and its applications. Science Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liu PD, Yang YM (2014) Multiple attribute decision-making method based on single-valued neutrosophic normalized weighted Bonferroni mean. Neural Comput Appl 25:2001–2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ye J (2014) A multicriteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:2459–2466MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
  44. 44.
    Peng JJ, Wang JQ, Wang J, Zhang HY, Chen XH (2016) Simplified neutrosophic sets and their applications in multi-criteria group decision-making problems. Int J Syst Sci 47:2342–2358CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Xu ZS (2011) Intuitionistic fuzzy Bonferroni means. IEEE T Syst Man Cybern B 41:568–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Natural Computing Applications Forum 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information Science and EngineeringShaoguan UniversityShaoguanChina

Personalised recommendations