A Group Decision Framework for Renewable Energy Source Selection under Interval-Valued Probabilistic linguistic Term Set

In recent years, the assessment of desirable renewable energy alternative has been an extremely important concern that could change the environment and economic growth. To tackle the circumstances, some authors have paid attention to selecting the desirable renewable energy option by employing the decision-making assessment and linguistic term sets. With a fast-growing interest in multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) problems, researchers are tirelessly working towards new techniques for better decision-making. Decision makers (DMs) generally rate alternatives linguistically with different probabilities occurring for each term. Previous studies on linguistic decision-making have either ignored this idea or have used an only a single value for representing the weight of the linguistic term. Since expression of the complete probability distribution is hard and implicit hesitation exists, representation of weights of the linguistic terms using a single value becomes imprecise and unreasonable. To avoid this challenge, an interval-valued probabilistic linguistic term set (IVPLTS) is used, which is a generalization of (probabilistic linguistic term set) PLTS. Inspired by the usefulness of IVPLTS concept, we develop a decision framework for rational decision making. Initially, some operational laws and axioms are presented. Further, a novel aggregation operator known as interval-valued probabilistic linguistic simple weighted geometry (IVPLSWG) is developed for aggregating DMs’ preferences. Also, criteria weights are determined using the newly developed interval-valued probabilistic linguistic standard variance (IVPLSV) approach and alternatives are ranked using the extended VIKOR (VlseKriterijumskaOptimizacijaKompromisnoResenje) method under IVPLTS environment. Finally, a numerical example of renewable energy assessment is demonstrated to show the practicality of the developed decision framework. Also, the strengths and weaknesses of the developed decision framework are illustrated by comparison with existing ones.