Measurement of Level-of-Satisfaction of Decision Maker in Intelligent Fuzzy-MCDM Theory: A Generalized Approach

  • Pandian Vasant
  • Arijit Bhattacharya
  • Ajith Abraham
Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 16)


The earliest definitions of decision support systems (DSS) identify DSS as systems to support managerial decision makers in unstructured or semiunstructured decision situations. They are also defined as a computer-based information systems used to support decision-making activities in situations where it is not possible or not desirable to have an automated system perform the entire decision process. This chapter aims to delineate measurement of level-of-satisfaction during decision making under an intelligent fuzzy environment. Before proceeding with the multi-criteria decision making model (MCDM), authors try to build a co-relation among DSS, decision theories, and fuzziness of information. The co-relation shows the necessity of incorporating decision makers’ level-of-satisfaction in MCDM models. Later, the authors introduce an MCDM model incorporating different cost factor components and the said level-of-satisfaction parameter. In a later chapter, the authors elucidate an application as well as validation of the devised model. The strength of the proposed MCDM methodology lies in combining both cardinal and ordinal information to get eclectic results from a complex, multi-person and multi-period problem hierarchically.

Key words

Decision support system level-of-satisfaction in MCDM 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agrell, P., 1995, Interactive multi-criteria decision-making in production economics, profil, series no 15, (Production-Economic Research in Linköping: Linköping, Sweden).Google Scholar
  2. Alter, S., 2004, A work system view of DSS in its fourth decade, Decision Support Systems, 38(3): 319-327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arbel, A., 1989, Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation, European Journal of Operational Research, 43: 317-326.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Arbel, A., and Vargas, L.G., 1990, The analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of MCDM, Farfaix, VA.Google Scholar
  5. Banuelas, R., and Antony, J., 2004, Modified analytic hierarchy process to incorporate uncertainty and managerial aspects, International Journal of Production Research, 42 (18): 3851-3872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bass, S.M., and Kwakernaak, H., 1977, Rating and ranking of multiple-aspect alternatives using fuzzy sets, Automatica, 13(1): 47-58.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Bellman, R.E., and Zadeh, L.A., 1970, Decision-making in a fuzzy environment, Management Science, 17(4): 141-164.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. Bells, S., 1999, Flexible Membership Functions. Available: http://www.louderthanabomb. com/spark_features.html. (Visited on 10 October, 2000).
  9. Bhattacharya, A., Sarkar, B., and Mukherjee, S.K., 2004, A new method for plant location selection: a holistic approach, International Journal of Industrial Engineering - Theory, Applications and Practice, 11(4): 330-338.Google Scholar
  10. Bhattacharya, A., Sarkar, B., and Mukherjee, S.K., 2005, Integrating AHP with QFD for robot selection under requirement perspective, International Journal of Production Research, 43(17): 3671-3685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boucher, T.O., and Gogus, O., 2002, Reliability, validity and imprecision in fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernatics - Part C: Applications and Reviews, 32(3): 1-15.Google Scholar
  12. Buckley, J.J., 1988, Generalized and extended fuzzy sets with application, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 25: 159-174.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Carlsson, C., and Korhonen, P., 1986, A parametric approach to fuzzy linear programming, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20: 17-30.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen, S.J., and Hwang, C.L., 1992, Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, G.B., 1974, Management Information Systems, 33, McGraw-Hill, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  16. Ghotb, F., and Warren, L., 1995, A case study comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy decision methodology, Engineering Economist, 40: 133-146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ginzberg, M.J., and Stohr, E.A., 1981, Decision support systems: Issues and perspectives in Proceedings of NYU Symposium on Decision Support Systems, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Gogus, O., and Boucher, T.O., 1997, A consistency test for rational weights in multi-criteria decision analysis with pair wise comparisons, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 86: 129-138.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. Gorry, G.A., and Scott Morton, M.S., 1971, A framework for management information systems, Sloan Management Review, 13(1): 55-70.Google Scholar
  20. Harris, R., 1998, Introduction to Decision Making. Available: rharris/crebook5.htm. (Accessed 14 October, 2000).
  21. Kuhlthau, C.C., 1993, A principle of uncertainty for information seeking, Journal of Documentation, 1993, 49(4): 339-355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leberling, H., 1981, On finding compromise solutions in multi-crtireria problems using the fuzzy min operator, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 6: 105-118.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Lai, Y.J., and Hwang, C.L., 1994, Fuzzy Multi-Objective Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Spinger-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  24. Liang, G.S., and Wang, M.J.J., 1994, Personnel selection using fuzzy MCDM algorithm, European Journal of Operational Research, 78: 222-233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lootsma, F.A., 1997, Fuzzy Logic for Planning and Decision Making, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Marcelloni, F., and Aksit, M., 2001, Leaving inconsistency using fuzzy logic, Information and Software Technology, 43: 725-741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nowakowska, N., 1977, Methodological problems of measurement of fuzzy concepts in the social sciences, Behavioural Science, 22: 107-115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rommelfanger, H., 1996, Fuzzy linear programming and applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 92: 512-527.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Russell, B., 1923, Vagueness, Australasian Journal of Philosophy and Psychology, 1: 84-92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saaty, T.L., 1990, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Saaty, T.L., 1994, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, Interfaces, 24(6): 19-43.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. Saaty, T.L., and Vargas, L.G., 1987, Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 32: 107-117.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. Saaty, T.L., 1980, The Analytical Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Saaty, T.L., 1990, How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1): 9-26.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tabucanon, M.T., 1996, Multi objective programming for industrial engineers. In Mathematical Programming for Industrial Engineers, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, pp. 487-542.Google Scholar
  36. Turban, E., 1990, Decision Support and Expert Systems: Management Support Systems, Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  37. Van Laarhoven, P.J.M., and Pedrycz, W., 1983, A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11: 229-241.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  38. Varela, L.R., and Ribeiro, R.A., 2003, Evaluation of simulated annealing to solve fuzzy optimization problems, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 14: 59-71.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Vasant, P., Nagarajan, R., and Yaacob, S., 2002, Decision making using modified S-curve membership function in fuzzy linear programming problem, Journal of Information and Communication Technology, 2: 1-16.Google Scholar
  40. Vasant, P., 2003, Application of fuzzy linear programming in production planning, Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 3: 229-241.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. Vasant, P., Nagarajan, R., and Yaacob, S., 2005, Fuzzy linear programming with vague objective coefficients in an uncertain environment, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 56(5): 597-603.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Watada, J., 1997, Fuzzy portfolio selection and its applications to decision making, Tatra Mountains Mathematics Publication, 13: 219-248.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. Wells, H. G., 1908, First and Last Things.Google Scholar
  44. Yager, R.R., and Basson, D., 1975, Decision making with fuzzy sets, Decision Sciences, 6(3): 590-600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zadeh, L.A., 1971, Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings. Information Sciences, 3: 177-206.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. Zadeh, L.A., 1975, The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning I, II, III, Information Sciences, 8: 199-251; 301-357; 9: 43-80.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. Zimmermann, H.J., 1976, Description and optimization of fuzzy systems, International Journal of General Systems, 2: 209-215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zimmermann, H. J., 1985, Application of fuzzy set theory to mathematical programming, Information Sciences, 36: 25-58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zimmermann, H.J., 1987, Fuzzy Sets, Decision Making and Expert Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pandian Vasant
    • 1
  • Arijit Bhattacharya
    • 2
  • Ajith Abraham
    • 3
  1. 1.Electrical and Electronic Engineering ProgramUniversiti Teknologi PetronasPerak DRMalaysia
  2. 2.School of Mechanical & Manufacturing EngineeringDublin City University, GlasnevinDublin 9Ireland
  3. 3.Center of Excellence for Quantifiable Quality of ServiceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations