Intuitionistic Fuzzy Three-Factor Ratio Models and Multi-preference Fusion | Cognitive Computation Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Intuitionistic Fuzzy Three-Factor Ratio Models and Multi-preference Fusion

  • Published:
Cognitive Computation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Generally, decision-makers (DMs) can provide subjective opinions based on their risk attitude and intuitionistic preference for specific alternatives and attributes, which can be taken as cognitive information. For instance, alternative A is better than alternatives B and C, or attribute 3 is the most important. These multi-dimensional preferences and social cognitive behavior described by DMs based on their subjective evaluation should be taken into account when making a decision. How to fuse multiple, uncertain, imprecise but important preferences and cognitive information and then make a decision in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment is becoming a practical issue. Therefore, this paper defines a three-factor ratio of the intuitionistic fuzzy number and then proposes a basic intuitionistic fuzzy three-factor ratio (IFTR) model. To present DMs’ risk preferences, this paper constructs two extreme IFTR models and describes risk preferences with a risk appetite parameter. For DMs’ alternative preferences, this paper develops a continuous IFTR model in which alternative preferences are fused to calculate the optimal risk appetite parameter. To fully consider DMs’ risk, alternative, and attribute preferences, this paper further proposes a generalized IFTR model. Thus, risk, alternative, and attribute preferences, which can be viewed as the social cognitive information, can be fused in an intuitionistic fuzzy decision-making and group decision-making process simultaneously. An illustrative example to address the problem of demolishing old urban villages is provided to show the effectiveness of the proposed models.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control. 1965;8(3):338–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Atanassov KT. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Set Syst. 1986;20(1):87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhao N, Xu ZS, Liu FJ. Group decision making with dual hesitant fuzzy preference relations. Cogn Comput. 2016;8(6):1119–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Torra V. Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst. 2010;25(6):529–39.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu XL, Wan SP. Combinatorial iterative algorithms for computing the centroid of an interval type-2 fuzzy set. IEEE T Fuzzy Syst. 2020;28(4):607–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bustince H, Barrenechea E, Pagola M. Generation of interval-valued fuzzy and Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy connectives from fuzzy connectives and from kα, operators: Laws for conjunctions and disjunctions, amplitude. Int J Intell Syst. 2008;23(6):680–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yager RR. Multicriteria decision making with ordinal/linguistic intuitionistic fuzzy sets for mobile apps. IEEE T Fuzzy Syst. 2016;24(3):590–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pattanayak RM, Behera HS, Panigrahi S. A novel probabilistic intuitionistic fuzzy set based model for high order fuzzy time series forecasting. Eng Appl Artif Intel. 2021;99:104136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Li DF, Cheng CT. New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions. Pattern Recogn Lett. 2002;23(1–3):221–5.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Garg H, Kumar K. An advanced study on the similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets based on the set pair analysis theory and their application in decision making. Soft Comput. 2018;22(15):4959–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Xia MM, Xu ZS, Zhu B. Some issues on intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators based on Archimedean t-conorm and t-norm. Knowl-Based Syst. 2012;31:78–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gupta P, Lin C, Mehlawat M, Grover N. A new method for intuitionistic fuzzy multiattribute decision making. IEEE T Syst Man Cy-S. 2016;46(9):1167–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Meng FY, Chen XH. Correlation coefficients of hesitant fuzzy sets and their application based on fuzzy measures. Cogn Comput. 2015;7(4):445–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Das S, Guha D, Mesiar R. Extended Bonferroni mean under intuitionistic fuzzy environment based on a strict t-conorm. IEEE T Syst Man Cy-S. 2017;47(8):2083–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu PD, Chen SM. Group decision making based on Heronian aggregation operators of intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. IEEE T Cybernetics. 2017;47(9):2514–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chaira T. A novel intuitionistic fuzzy C means clustering algorithm and its application to medical images. Appl Soft Comput. 2011;11(2):1711–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Xu ZS, Wu JJ. Intuitionistic fuzzy C-means clustering algorithms. J Syst Eng Electron. 2010;21(4):580–590.

  18. Otay I, Oztaysi B, Onar C, Kahraman C. Multi-expert performance evaluation of healthcare institutions using an integrated intuitionistic fuzzy AHP&DEA methodology. Knowl-Based Syst. 2017;133:90–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen SM, Cheng SH, Chiou CH. Fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets and evidential reasoning methodology. Inform Fusion. 2016;27:215–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu Y, Bi JW, Fan ZP. Ranking products through online reviews: a method based on sentiment analysis technique and intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. Inform Fusion. 2017;36:149–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yu DJ, Xu ZS. Intuitionistic fuzzy two-sided matching model and its application to personnel-position matching problems. J Oper Res Soc. 2020;71(2):312–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rashid T, Faizi S, Xu ZS, Zafar S. ELECTRE-based outranking method for multi-criteria decision making using hesitant intuitionistic fuzzy linguistic term sets. Int J Fuzzy Syst. 2018;20(1):78–92.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Gupta P, Mehlawat MK, Grover N. A generalized TOPSIS method for intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making considering different scenarios of attributes weight information. Int J Fuzzy Syst. 2019;21(2):369–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mishra AM, Mardani A, Rani P, Zavadskas EK. A novel EDAS approach on intuitionistic fuzzy set for assessment of health-care waste disposal technology using new parametric divergence measures. J Clean Prod. 2020;272:122807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tao R, Liu ZY, Cai R, Cheong KH. A dynamic group MCDM model with intuitionistic fuzzy set: perspective of alternative queuing method. Inform Sciences. 2021;555:85–103.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Jammernegg W, Kischka P. Risk preferences and robust inventory decisions. Int J Prod Econ. 2009;118(1):269–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zhou W, Xu ZS. Generalized asymmetric linguistic term set and its application to qualitative decision making involving risk appetites. Eur J Oper Res. 2016;254(2):610–21.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Ji L, Zhang BB, Huang GH, Xie YL, Niu DX. Explicit cost-risk tradeoff for optimal energy management in CCHP microgrid system under fuzzy-risk preferences. Energ Econ. 2018;70:525–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cao J, Xuan H, Dai F, Pan B. An evolution model of risk preference influenced by extremists in large group emergency consensus process. J Intell Fuzzy Syst. 2020;39(2):7733–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang GL, Yang JB, Xu DL, Khoveyni M. A three-stage hybrid approach for weight assignment in MAMD. Omega. 2017;71:93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dong YC, Liu YT, Liang HM, Chiclana F, Herrera-Viedma E. Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making. Omega. 2018;75:154–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang HQ, Jiang W, Deng XY. Data-driven multi-attribute decision-making by combining probability distributions based on compatibility and entropy. Appl Intell. 2020;50:4081–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Xu ZS, Yager RR. Some geometric aggregation operators based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Gen Syst. 2006;35(4):417–33.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Chen SM, Tan JM. Handling multi-criteria fuzzy decision making problems based on vague set theory. Fuzzy Set Syst. 1994;67(2):163–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units. Eur J Oper Res. 1978;2(6):429–44.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Doyle J, Green R. Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses. J Oper Res Soc. 1994;45(5):567–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jia ZS, Zhang Y. Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making with uncertain weights. Math Probl Eng. 2019;2019:5092147.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China [grant numbers 71561026, 71840001].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Finance, Yunnan University of Finance and Economics, Kunming, 650221, People’s Republic of China

    Wei Zhou

  2. Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610064, People’s Republic of China

    Wei Zhou & Zeshui Xu

Authors
  1. Wei Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zeshui Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeshui Xu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

All human participants gave an informed consent.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhou, W., Xu, Z. Intuitionistic Fuzzy Three-Factor Ratio Models and Multi-preference Fusion. Cogn Comput 13, 1246–1262 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-021-09928-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-021-09928-4

Keywords