Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Using Neutrosophic Sets pp 647–676Cite as

Simple Additive Weighting and Weighted Product Methods Using Neutrosophic Sets

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 369))

Abstract

Scoring methods are the most frequently used multiple attribute decision-making methods because of their simplicity and efficiency. In this chapter, Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) and Weighted Product Methods (WPM) are extended to their fuzzy versions by using neutrosophic sets. These sets not only handle the vagueness but also clarify indeterminacy of decision makers’ opinions. This also lets us discriminate between relativity and absoluteness. We apply interval-valued neutrosophic SAW and WPM methods for selection of insurance options.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bridgman, P.W.: Dimensional Analysis. Yale University Press (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Miller, D.W., Starr, M.K.: Executive Decisions and Operations Research. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dubois, D., Prade, H.: Fuzzy Sets and Systems. Academic, New York (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Roy, B.: “Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples”, Revue française d’automatique, d’informatique et de recherche opérationnelle. Rech. opérationnelle 2(1), 57–75 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Saaty, T.L.: The Analytical Hierarchy Process, Planning, Priority. Resource Allocation. RWS Publications, USA (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Duckstein, L., Opricovic, S.: Multiobjective optimization in river basin development. Water Resour. Res. 16(1), 14–20 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making-Methods and Applications, A State of the Art Survey. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1981)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Brans, J.P., Vincke, P.: Note—a preference ranking organisation method: (The PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making). Manage. Sci. 31(6), 647–656 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Network Process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen, S.J., Hwang, C.L.: Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods. In Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chen, C.B., Klein, C.M.: An efficient approach to solving fuzzy MADM problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 88(1), 51–67 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Triantaphyllou, E., Lin, C.T.: Development and evaluation of five fuzzy multiattribute decision-making method. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 14(4), 281–310 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, T.: An interactive signed distance approach for multiple criteria group decision-making based on simple additive weighting method with incomplete preference information defined by interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 13(5), 979–1012 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaur, P., Kumar, S.: An intuitionistic fuzzy simple additive weighting (IFSAW) method for selection of vendor (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zhang, Z.: Hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making with unknown weight information. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 19(3), 615–636 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Smarandache, F.: Neutrosophic logic and set, mss (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rivieccio, U.: Neutrosophic logics: prospects and problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 159(14), 1860–1868 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Turskis, Z., Daniūnas, A., Zavadskas, E.K., Medzvieckas, J.: Multicriteria evaluation of building foundation alternatives. Comput-Aided Civ. Inf. Eng. 31(9), 717–729 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Atmojo, R.N.P., Cahyani, A.D., Lie, Y.: Simulation modeling of tablet PCs selection using weighted-product algorithm. Appl. Math. Sci. 8(113–116), 5705–5719 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Adriyendi, A.: Multi-attribute decision making using simple additive weighting and weighted product in food choice. Int. J. Inf. Eng. Electron. Bus. 6, 8–14 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Radwan, N., Senousy, M.B., Alaa El Din, R.: Neutrosophic AHP multi criteria decision making method applied on the selection of learning management system. Int. J. Advancements Comput. Technol. 8(5), 95–105 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Broumi, S., Ye, J., Smarandache, F.: An extended TOPSIS method for multiple attribute decision making based on interval neutrosophic uncertain linguistic variables. In: Neutrosophic Sets & Systems (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Nădăban, S., Dzitac, S.: Neutrosophic TOPSIS: a general view. In: 6th International Conference on In Computers Communications and Control (ICCCC)- IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Peng, X., Liu, C.: Algorithms for neutrosophic soft decision making based on EDAS and new similarity measure. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wang, H., Smarandache, F., Sunderraman, R., Zhang, Y.Q.: Interval neutrosophic sets and logic: theory and applications in computing. Infinite Study (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zhang, H., Wang, J., Chen, X.: An outranking approach for multi-criteria decision-making problems with interval-valued neutrosophic sets. Neural Comput. Appl. 27(3), 615–627 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhang, H.Y., Wang, J.Q., Chen, X.H.: Interval neutrosophic sets and their application in multicriteria decision making problems. Sci. World J. (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Biswas, P., Pramanik, S., Giri, B.C.: TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput. Appl. 27(3), 727–737 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Annette, J.R., Banu, A., Chandran, P.S.: Comparison of multi criteria decision making algorithms for ranking cloud renderfarm services. CoRR. 9(31), 1–5 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Maymand, M.M., Bazazzadeh, S.H., Eghbal, R.: A hybrid MCDM model for identification and prioritisation of the factors affecting shopping behaviour of foreign tourists. Int. J. Serv. Oper. Manag. 26(3), 294–317 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Krylovas, A., Kosareva, N., Zavadskas, E.K.: WEBIRA-comparative analysis of weight balancing method. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 12(2), 238–253 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Górecka, D., Roszkowska, E., Wachowicz, T.: The MARS approach in the verbal and holistic evaluation of the negotiation template. Group Decis. Negot. 25(6), 1097–1136 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Dai, T., Liu, X., Gao, R., Lu, W.: Distinguished representation of criteria based on trapezoidal fuzzy numbers and fuzzy memberships in selection of contractors. J. Donghua Univ. (English Edition) 33(5), 713–718 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wang, P., Zhu, Z., Wang, Y.: A novel hybrid MCDM model combining the SAW, TOPSIS and GRA methods based on experimental design T2. Inf. Sci. 345, 27–45 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jovanovic, S., Savic, S., Jovicic, N., Boskovic, G., Djordjevic, Z.: Using multi-criteria decision making for selection of the optimal strategy for municipal solid waste management. Waste Manage. Res. 34(9), 884–895 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hassen, W.F., Najjar, F.: A positioning handoff decision algorithm for ubiquitous pedestrian navigation systems. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, 487–494 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  38. De Brito, M.M., Evers, M.: Multi-criteria decision-making for flood risk management: a survey of the current state of the art. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 16(4), 1019–1033 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Abdullah, L., Adawiyah, C.W.R.: Simple additive weighting methods of multi criteria decision making and applications: a decade review. Int. J. Inf. Process. Manag. (IJIPM) 5(1) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Shameli, S.A., Shajari, M., Hassanabadi, M., Jabbarifar, M., Dagenais, M.: Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making for information security risk assessment. Open Cybern. Syst. J. 6, 26–37 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Mehdy, H.S.S., Roozbahani, A.: Selecting an appropriate operational method for main irrigation canals within multicriteria decision-making methods. J. Irrig. Drainage Eng. 142(4) (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Srisawat, C., Payakpate, J.: Comparison of MCDM methods for intercrop selection in rubber plantations. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. 15(1), 165–182 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kasim, M.M., Ibrahim, H., Bataineh, M.S.: Multi-criteria decision making methods for determining computer reference index. J. ICT. 10, 137–148 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wang, Y.J.: A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model based on simple additive weighting method and relative preference relation. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 30, 412–420 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Eshlagly, A.T., Ghafelehbashi, S., Alaghebandha, M.: An investigation and ranking public and private islamic banks using dimension of service quality (SERVQUAL) based on TOPSIS fuzzy technique. Appl. Math. Sci. 5(61), 3031–3049 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zmeškal, Z., Dluhošová, D.: Multiple attribute evaluation of company financial level applying soft methodology (fuzzy approach). In: IRMC, pp. 1–9 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Afshari, A., Mojahed, M., Yusuff, R.M.: Simple additive weighting approach to personnel selection problem. Int. J. Innov. Manag. Technol. 1(5), 511–515 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Deni, W., Sudana, O., Sasmita, A.: Analysis and implementation fuzzy multi-attribute decision making saw method for selection of high achieving students in faculty level. Int. J. Comput. Sci. 10(1), 674–680 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Gupta, S., Gupta, A.: A fuzzy multi criteria decision making approach for vendor evaluation in a supply chain. Intersci. Manag. Rev. 2(3), 10–16 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Kumar, M., Jayaswal, P., Kushwah, K.: Exploring fuzzy SAW method for maintenance strategy selection problem of material handling equipment. Int. J. Curr. Eng. Technol. 3(2), 600–605 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Rajaie, H., Hazrati, A., Rashidi, A.: Evaluation of construction contractors in developing countries using fuzzy SAW method. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing Civil and Building Engineering, 283 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Chou, S.Y., Chang, Y.H., Shen, C.Y.: A fuzzy simple additive weighting system under group decision-making for facility location selection with objective/subjective attributes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 189(1), 132–145 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kabassi, K.: Fuzzy simple additive weighting for evaluating a personalised geographical information system. New directions in intelligent interactive multimedia systems and services-2. studies. Comput. Intell. 226, 275–284 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Abdullah, L., Jamal, N.J.: Determination of weights for health related quality of life indicators among kidney patients: a fuzzy decision making method. Appl. Res. Qual. Life. 6(4), 349–361 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Lin, H.Y., Liao, C.J., Chang, Y.H.: Applying fuzzy simple additive weighting system to health examination institution location selection. In: 2010 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 646–650 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kiris, S., Ustun, O.: Fuzzy mcdm approach of stocks evaluation and portfolio selection. In: Proceeding of the International Conference on Continuous Optimization and Information-Based Technologies in the Financial Sector, pp. 330–336 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Afshari Reza, A., Yusuff, R., Derayatifar, A.R.: Project manager selection by using Fuzzy Simple Additive Weighting method. In: International Conference on Innovation Management and Technology Research, pp. 412–416 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Hematyar, S.: Fuzzy classification of gas power plant spare parts by combination statistical classification technique, SAW, ABC analysis. In: IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Workshop Series on Innovative Wireless Power Transmission: Technologies, Systems, and Applications, 1800–1804 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Manokaran, E., Senthilvel, S., Subhashini, S., Muruganandham, R., Ravichandran, K.: Mathematical model for performance rating in software industry- a study using artificial neural network. Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res. 3(4), 4–7 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Memariani, A., Amini, A., Alinezhad, A.: Sensitivity analysis of simple additive weighting method (SAW): the results of change in the weight of one attribute on the final ranking of alternatives. J. Ind. Eng. 4, 13–18 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Chen, T.Y.: Comparative analysis of SAW and TOPSIS based on interval-valued fuzzy sets: discussions on score functions and weight constraints. Expert Syst. Appl. 39(2), 1848–1861 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Huang, Y.S., Chang, W.C., Li, W.H., Lin, Z.L.: Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 229(2), 462–469 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  63. Borkar, P., Sarode M.V., Malik L.G.: Acoustic signal based optimal route selection problem: performance comparison of multi-attribute decision making methods 10(2), 647–669 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pipyros K., Thraskias C., Mitrou L., Gritzalis D., Apostolopoulos T.: A new strategy for improving cyber-attacks evaluation in the context of Tallinn manual. Comput. Secur. Article in Press (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Dwivedi, S., Mishra, V., Kosta, Y.: Application of teaching learning based optimization in antenna designing. Adv. Electromagn. 4(1), 68–73 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Razavi Hajiagha, S.H., Hashemi, S.S.: Extension of weighted aggregated sum product assessment with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (WASPAS-IVIF). Appl. Soft Comput. J. 24, 1013–1021 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Jain, V., Raj, T.: Evaluation of flexibility in FMS using SAW and WPM. Decis. Sci. Lett. 2(4), 223–230 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Talebifard, P., Leung, V.C.M.: A dynamic context-aware access network selection for handover in heterogeneous network environments. In: 2011 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops, INFOCOM WKSHPS 2011, pp. 385–390 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Gangurde, S.R., Akarte, M.M.: Ranking of product alternatives based on customer-designer preferences. In: IEEM2010—IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, pp. 75–79 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Talebifard, P., Leung, V.C.M.: Context-aware mobility management in heterogeneous network environments. J. Wirel. Mobile Netw. Ubiquit. Comput. Dependable Appl. 2(2), 19–32 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Engineering Department, Management Faculty, Istanbul Technical University, 34367, Macka, Istanbul, Turkey

    Eda Boltürk, Ali Karaşan & Cengiz Kahraman

  2. Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Yildiz Technical University, 34220, Esenler, Istanbul, Turkey

    Ali Karaşan

Authors
  1. Eda Boltürk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Karaşan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cengiz Kahraman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eda Boltürk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Macka, Istanbul, Turkey

    Cengiz Kahraman

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Okan University, Akfirat-Tuzla, Istanbul, Turkey

    İrem Otay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Boltürk, E., Karaşan, A., Kahraman, C. (2019). Simple Additive Weighting and Weighted Product Methods Using Neutrosophic Sets. In: Kahraman, C., Otay, İ. (eds) Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Using Neutrosophic Sets. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 369. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00045-5_25

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation