Advertisement

Granular Computing

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 229–244 | Cite as

Linguistic dynamic multicriteria decision making using symbolic linguistic computing models

  • Yeleny Zulueta-Veliz
  • Pedro J. Sanchez
Original Paper

Abstract

In fuzzy environments, decision information is more suitable to be expressed in linguistic labels than exact numerical values. A linguistic dynamic multicriteria decision making (LDMCDM) problem consists of a finite set of periods in which a set of experts express their evaluations about a finite set of alternatives on a linguistic term set, to select the best alternative of the problem. To deal with linguistic information in LDMCDM, two main symbolic linguistic computing models have been applied: the 2-tuple and the virtual linguistic computing models. In this contribution, we review these symbolic computing models and also propose a resolution scheme for solving LDMCDM problems. Special emphasis is put into time-dependent aggregation operators due to they are crucial in this type of problems. Thereafter we apply them to a green supplier selection problem to stress the suitability of the proposed resolution scheme, and to analyse the results obtained with both models mainly in terms of representation of linguistic outcomes as well as their interpretability and accuracy. Eventually, some challenges are introduced for further research.

Keywords

Linguistic decision making Dynamic decision making 2-Tuple linguistic model Virtual linguistic model 

Notes

References

  1. Ai F, Yang J (2014) Approaches to dynamic multiple attribute decision making with 2-tuple linguistic information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(6):2715–2723.  https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-131094 MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Atanassov K (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Beg I, Rashid T (2014) Aggregation operators of interval-valued 2-tuple linguistic information. Int J Intell Syst 29(7):634–667.  https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21650 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campanella G, Ribeiro R (2011) A framework for dynamic multiple-criteria decision making. Decis Support Syst 52(1):52–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrasco R, Noz FM, Sánchez J, Liébana F (2012) A model for the integration of e-financial services questionnaires with SERVQUAL scales under fuzzy linguistic modeling. Expert Syst Appl 39(14):11,535–11,547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen S, Hong J (2014) Multicriteria linguistic decision making based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and the aggregation of fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 286(Supplement C):63–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.06.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen S, Tsai B (2015) Autocratic decision making using group recommendations based on intervals of linguistic terms and likelihood-based comparison relations. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 45(2):250–259.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2014.2356436 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cid-López A, Hornos M, Carrasco R, Herrera-Viedma E (2016) Applying a linguistic multi-criteria decision-making model to the analysis of ict suppliers’ offers. Expert Syst Appl 57(Supplement C):127–138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.03.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Degani R, Bortolan G (1988) The problem of linguistic approximation in clinical decision making. Int J Approx Reason 2(2):143–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0888-613X(88)90105-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dong Q, Guo Y (2013) Multiperiod multiattribute decision-making method based on trend incentive coefficient. Int Trans Oper Res 20:141–152MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy sets and systems: theory and applications. Kluwer, DordrechtzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Dutta B, Guha D (2015a) Decision makers’ opinions changing attitude-driven consensus model under linguistic environment and its application in dynamic MAGDM problems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 73–95.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16829-6_4 Google Scholar
  13. Dutta B, Guha D (2015b) A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with heterogeneous relationship among attributes in multi-expert decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(5):1817–1831.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.2379291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dutta B, Guha D (2015) Partitioned bonferroni mean based on linguistic 2-tuple for dealing with multi-attribute group decision making. Appl Soft Comput 37:166–179.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E (2000) Linguistic decision analysis: steps for solving decision problems under linguistic information. Fuzzy Sets Syst 115:67–82MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Herrera F, Martínez L (2000) A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 8(6):746–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ho N, Wechler W (1990) Hedge algebras: an algebraic approach to structures of sets of linguistic domains of linguistic truth variable. Fuzzy Sets Syst 35(3):281–293CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Jiang L, Liu H, Cai J (2015) The power average operator for unbalanced linguistic term sets. Inf Fusion 22:85–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2014.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jimenez G, Zulueta Y (2017) A 2-tuple linguistic multi-period decision making approach for dynamic green supplier selection. Revis DYNA 84(202):199–206.  https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v84n202.58032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ju Y, Liu X, Wang A (2016) Some new shapley 2-tuple linguistic choquet aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute group decision making. Soft Comput 20(10):4037–4053.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-1740-3 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Karsak EE, Dursun M (2015) An integrated fuzzy mcdm approach for supplier evaluation and selection. Comput Ind Eng 82(Supplement C):82–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2015.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee L, Chen S (2015a) Fuzzy decision making and fuzzy group decision making based on likelihood-based comparison relations of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 29(3):1119–1137.  https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-151715 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee L, Chen S (2015b) Fuzzy decision making based on likelihood-based comparison relations of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and hesitant fuzzy linguistic operators. Inf Sci 294(Supplement C):513–529.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.09.061 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Y, Liu P (2015) Some heronian mean operators with 2-tuple linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Technol Econ Dev Econ 21(5):797–814.  https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2015.1055614 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liao H, Xu Z, Xu J (2014) An approach to hesitant fuzzy multi-stage multi-criterion decision making. Kybernetes 43(9):1447–1468MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lin J, Zhang Q, Meng F (2015) An approach for facility location selection based on optimal aggregation operator. Knowl Based Syst 85:143–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lin Y, Lee P, Ting H (2008) Dynamic multi-attribute decision making model with grey number evaluations. Expert Syst Appl 35:1638–1644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu P, Su Y (2010) The multiple-attribute decision making method based on the TFLHOWA operator. Comput Math Appl 60(9):2609–2615.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2010.08.087 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu X, Tao Z, Chen H, Zhou L (2016) A magdm method based on 2-tuple linguistic heronian mean and new operational laws. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 24(04):593–627.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488516500288 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu Y (2014) A method for 2-tuple linguistic dynamic multiple attribute decision making with entropy weight. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(4):1803–1810.  https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-141147 MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Massanet S, Riera J, Torrens J, Herrera-Viedma E (2014) A new linguistic computational model based on discrete fuzzy numbers for computing with words. Inf Sci 258:277–290.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.06.055 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Meng F, Tang J (2013) Extended 2-tuple linguistic hybrid aggregation operators and their application to multi-attribute group decision making. Int J Comput Intell Syst 4(2):1–14Google Scholar
  33. Merigó J, Casanovas M (2010) Linguistic weighted aggregation under confidence levels. Decis Mak Distance Meas Linguist Aggreg Oper 12(3):190–198Google Scholar
  34. Merigó J, Gil-Lafuente A (2013) Induced 2-tuple linguistic generalized aggregation operators and their application in decision-making. Inf Sci 236:1–16MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Merigó J, Casanovas M, Martínez L (2010) Linguistic aggregation operators for linguistic decision making based on the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowledge Based Syst 18(3):287–304.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488510006544 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Miyamoto S (2004) Fuzzy decision making based on likelihood-based comparison relations of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and hesitant fuzzy linguistic operators. Int J Intell Syst 19(7):639–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. de Oliveira Moura-Santos L, Osiro L, Palma-Lima R (2017) A model based on 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation and analytic hierarchy process for supplier segmentation using qualitative and quantitative criteria. Expert Syst Appl 79(Supplement C):53–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.032 Google Scholar
  38. Park J, Kwun Y, Koo J (2010) Dynamic linguistic weighted averaging operators applied to decision making. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE IEEM, pp 921–925Google Scholar
  39. Pedrycz W (2013) Granular computing: analysis and design of intelligent systems. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pedrycz W, Chen S (2011) Granular computing and intelligent systems: design with information granules of higher order and higher type. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pedrycz W, Chen S (2015a) Granular computing and decision-making: interactive and iterative approaches. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pedrycz W, Chen S (2015b) Information Granularity, big data, and computational intelligence. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Peng D, Wang H (2014) Dynamic hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators in multi-period decision making. Kybernetes 43(5):715–736MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Qin J, Liu X (2016) 2-tuple linguistic muirhead mean operators for multiple attribute group decision making and its application to supplier selection. Kybernetes 45(1):2–29.  https://doi.org/10.1108/K-11-2014-0271 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ribeiro R, Pais T, Simoes L (2010) Benefits of full-reinforcement operators for spacecraft target landing. Stud Fuzziness Soft Comput 257:353–367CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  46. Rodríguez R, Martínez L (2013) An analysis of symbolic linguistic computing models in decision making. Int J Gen Syst 42(1):121–136MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. Roubens M (1997) Fuzzy sets and decision analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 90(2):199–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00087-0 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. So H, N H, C H (2016) Development of some linguistic aggregation operators with conservation of interaction between criteria and their application in multiple attribute group decision problems. TOP 24(3):635–664.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11750-016-0412-5 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(6):529–539.  https://doi.org/10.1002/int.v25:6 zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. Torres R, Salas R, Astudillo H (2014) Time-based hesitant fuzzy information aggregation approach for decision-making problems. Int J Intell Syst 29(6):579–595.  https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21658 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wan S (2013) 2-Tuple linguistic hybrid arithmetic aggregation operators and application to multi-attribute group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 45(Supplement C):31–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2013.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang J, Hao J (2006) A new version of 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 14(3):435–445.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2006.876337 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang J, Wang D, Zhang H, Chen X (2013) Multi-criteria group decision making method based on interval 2-tuple linguistic information and choquet integral aggregation operators. Soft Comput 19(2):389–405CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. Wei G (2009) Some geometric aggregating operator and their application to dynamic multiple attribute decision making in intuitionistic fuzzy setting. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 17(02):179–196.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488509005802 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  55. Wei G (2010) A method for multiple attribute group decision making based on the et-wg and et-owg operators with 2-tuple linguistic information. Expert Syst Appl 37:7895–7900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wei G (2011) Some generalized aggregating operators with linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Comput Ind Eng 61(1):32–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2011.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wei G (2011b) Some harmonic aggregation operators with 2-tuple linguistic assessment information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 19(6):977–998.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488511007428 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  58. Wei G, Zhao X (2012) Some dependent aggregation operators with 2-tuple linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Expert Syst Appl 39(5):5881–5886.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.11.120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wen X, Yan M, Xian J, Yue R, Peng A (2016) Supplier selection in supplier chain management using choquet integral-based linguistic operators under fuzzy heterogeneous environment. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 15(3):307–330.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10700-015-9228-2 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Xu Y, Wang H (2011) Approaches based on 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators for multiple attribute group decision making under linguistic environment. Appl Soft Comput 11(5):3988–3997.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2011.02.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Xu Y, Wang H (2011b) Distance measure for linguistic decision making. Syst Eng Proc 1:450–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Xu Z (2004a) EOWA and EOWG operators for aggregating linguistic labels based on linguistic preference relations. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 12(06):791–810.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488504003211 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. Xu Z (2004b) A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations. Inf Sci 166(1–4):19–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2003.10.006 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  64. Xu Z (2005a) An approach to group decision making based on incomplete linguistic preference relations. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 4(1):153–160.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622005001349 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Xu Z (2005b) Extended eiowg operator and ita use in group decision making based on multiplicative linguistic preference relations. Am J Appl Sci 2(3):633–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Xu Z (2006a) An approach based on the uncertain LOWG and induced uncertain LOWG operators to group decision making with uncertain multiplicative linguistic preference relations. Decis Support Syst 41(2):488–499.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2004.08.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Xu Z (2006b) Induced uncertain linguistic OWA operators applied to group decision making. Inf Fusion 7(2):231–238.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2004.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Xu Z (2008) On multi-period multi-attribute decision making. Knowl Based Syst 21(2):164–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Xu Z (2009a) Correlated linguistic information aggregation. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 17(5):633–647.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488509006182 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. Xu Z (2009b) Multi-period multi-attribute group decision-making under linguistic assessments. Int J Gen Syst 38(8):823–850.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03081070903257920 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. Xu Z (2011) Approaches to multi-stage multi-attribute group decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 10(01):121–146.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622011004257 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  72. Xu Z, Wang H (2017) On the syntax and semantics of virtual linguistic terms for information fusion in decision making. Inf Fusion 34(C):43–48.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2016.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Xu Z, Yager R (2008) Dynamic intuitionistic fuzzy multi-attribute decision making. Int J Approx Reason 48(1):246–262CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. Yager R (1995) An approach to ordinal decision making. Int J Approx Reason 2:237–261.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0888-613X(94)00035-2 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  75. Yager R, Rybalov A (1998) Full reinforcement operators in aggregation techniques. Syst Man Cybern Part B Cybern IEEE Trans 28(6):757–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yang W (2013) Induced Choquet integrals of 2-tuple linguistic information. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 21(02):175–200.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488513500104 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  77. Yang Z, Huang L (2017) Dynamic stochastic multiattribute decision-making that considers stochastic variable variance characteristics under time-sequence contingency environments. Math Probl Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/7126856 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  78. You X, You J, Liu H, Zhen L (2015) Group multi-criteria supplier selection using an extended VIKOR method with interval 2-tuple linguistic information. Expert Syst Appl 42(4):1906–1916.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.10.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zadeh L (1975) The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Inf Sci 8(3):199–249.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  80. Zadeh L (1996) Fuzzy logic = computing with words. Trans Fuzzy Syst 4(2):103–111.  https://doi.org/10.1109/91.493904 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zadeh LA (1997) Toward a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets Syst 90(2):111–127.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00077-8 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhang C, Su W, Zeng S, Zhang L (2015) Linguistic weighted aggregation under confidence levels. Math Probl Eng 2015:1–8MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  83. Zhang L, Zou H, Yang F (2011) A dynamic web service composition algorithm based on topsis. J Netw 6(9):1296–1304Google Scholar
  84. Zhu Q, Li H, Yu M (2013) Dynamic multi-attribute decision making based on advantage retention degree. J Inf Comput Sci 10(04):1105–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zulueta Y, Martell V, Martínez L (2013a) A dynamic multi-expert multi-criteria decision making model for risk analysis. Lectu Notes Comput Sci Lectu Notes Artif Intelli Mexico 8265:132–143Google Scholar
  86. Zulueta Y, Martínez J, Bello R, Martínez L (2013b) A discrete time variable index for supporting dynamic multi-criteria decision making. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 22(1):1–22MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Informatics ScienceHavanaCuba
  2. 2.University of JaenJaénSpain

Personalised recommendations