IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i8p1308-d395579.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Rough Set Theory in Relation to Risks Regarding Hydraulic Engineering Investment Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Jihong Qu

    (College of Geosciences and Engineering, North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power, Zhengzhou 450046, China)

  • Xiao Bai

    (School of Finance, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Jiajun Gu

    (Hangzhou College of Commerce, Zhejiang Gongshang University, Hangzhou 310018, China)

  • Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary

    (Social Science Research Institute, Tokai University, Hiratsuka-shi 259-1292, Kanagawa-ken, Japan)

  • Ji Lin

    (School of Finance, Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics, Hangzhou 310018, China)

Abstract

Rough set theory is a mathematics tool specifying imperfection and uncertainty. Based on the knowledge theory of the rough set, the numerical values of some features or attributes are not required. Through data reduction, this article analyzes the investment decision of hydraulic engineering and obtains the following by reduction: i. when the construction expense of the hydraulic engineering is low, but the financial income is high, the investment in the construction project can be selected; ii. when the expense of the hydraulic construction project is low and the external influence is common or the financial expense is common, if the external influence is low or the financial income is high, the investment can be delayed; iii. when the construction strategic benefit of the hydraulic engineering is low, the decision rule of no investment can be selected. The novel findings discovered by this article have provided scientific information regarding investment decisions of hydraulic engineering.

Suggested Citation

  • Jihong Qu & Xiao Bai & Jiajun Gu & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary & Ji Lin, 2020. "Assessment of Rough Set Theory in Relation to Risks Regarding Hydraulic Engineering Investment Decisions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-9, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:8:p:1308-:d:395579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/8/1308/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/8/1308/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lu, Shibao & Zhang, Xiaoling & Bao, Haijun & Skitmore, Martin, 2016. "Review of social water cycle research in a changing environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 132-140.
    2. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 2001. "Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 1-47, February.
    3. Lu, Shibao & Bai, Xiao & Li, Wei & Wang, Ning, 2019. "Impacts of climate change on water resources and grain production," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 76-84.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu, Shibao & Jiang, Yue & Deng, Weisheng & Meng, Xu, 2023. "Energy and food production security under water resources regulation in the context of green development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Shibao Lu & Xiaoling Zhang & Yao Tang, 2020. "Evolutionary analysis on structural characteristics of water resource system in basins of Northern China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 800-812, July.
    3. Wen-Min Lu & Qian Long Kweh & Chung-Wei Wang, 2021. "Integration and application of rough sets and data envelopment analysis for assessments of the investment trusts industry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 163-194, January.
    4. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    5. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    6. Doumpos, M. & Marinakis, Y. & Marinaki, M. & Zopounidis, C., 2009. "An evolutionary approach to construction of outranking models for multicriteria classification: The case of the ELECTRE TRI method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 496-505, December.
    7. Skorupski, Jacek & Uchroński, Piotr, 2017. "A fuzzy model for evaluating metal detection equipment at airport security screening checkpoints," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 39-48.
    8. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4080 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Becchio, Cristina & Bottero, Marta Carla & Corgnati, Stefano Paolo & Dell’Anna, Federico, 2018. "Decision making for sustainable urban energy planning: an integrated evaluation framework of alternative solutions for a NZED (Net Zero-Energy District) in Turin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 803-817.
    11. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2010. "Handling multicriteria preferences in cluster analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 819-827, May.
    12. Pawel Lezanski & Maria Pilacinska, 2018. "The dominance-based rough set approach to cylindrical plunge grinding process diagnosis," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 989-1004, June.
    13. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    14. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    15. McKenna, R. & Bertsch, V. & Mainzer, K. & Fichtner, W., 2018. "Combining local preferences with multi-criteria decision analysis and linear optimization to develop feasible energy concepts in small communities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1092-1110.
    16. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    17. Bouyssou, Denis & Pirlot, Marc, 2009. "An axiomatic analysis of concordance-discordance relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 468-477, December.
    18. Azam, Nouman & Zhang, Yan & Yao, JingTao, 2017. "Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 704-714.
    19. Nikolaos Argyris & Alec Morton & José Rui Figueira, 2014. "CUT: A Multicriteria Approach for Concavifiable Preferences," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 633-642, June.
    20. Tiantian Ma & Qingbai Hu & Changle Wang & Jungang Lv & Changhong Mi & Rongguang Shi & Xiaoli Wang & Yanying Yang & Wenhao Wu, 2022. "Exploring the Relationship between Ecosystem Services under Different Socio-Economic Driving Degrees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-17, December.
    21. Fernández, Eduardo & Figueira, José Rui & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2022. "Handling imperfect information in multiple criteria decision-making through a comprehensive interval outranking approach," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:8:p:1308-:d:395579. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.