IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v25y2016i1d10.1007_s10726-015-9437-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflicting Bifuzzy Multi-attribute Group Decision Making Model with Application to Flood Control Project

Author

Listed:
  • Che Mohd Imran Che Taib

    (University Malaysia Terengganu)

  • Binyamin Yusoff

    (University Malaysia Terengganu)

  • Mohd Lazim Abdullah

    (University Malaysia Terengganu)

  • Abdul Fatah Wahab

    (University Malaysia Terengganu)

Abstract

We propose a group decision making model based on conflicting bifuzzy sets (CBFS) where evaluation are bi-valued in accordance to the subjective assessment obtained from the experts for the positive and negative views. This paper discusses the weighting methods for particular attribute and subattribute with emphasis given to the unification of subjective and objective weights. The integration of CBFS in the model is naturally done by extending the fuzzy evaluation in parallel with the intuitionistic fuzzy. We introduce a new technique to compute the similarity measure, being the degree of agreement between the experts. We end up the paper by demonstrating the applicability of the proposed model to the empirical case of flood control project, one of the project selection problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Che Mohd Imran Che Taib & Binyamin Yusoff & Mohd Lazim Abdullah & Abdul Fatah Wahab, 2016. "Conflicting Bifuzzy Multi-attribute Group Decision Making Model with Application to Flood Control Project," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 157-180, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:25:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-015-9437-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-015-9437-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-015-9437-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-015-9437-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jun Ye, 2013. "Multiple Attribute Group Decision-Making Methods with Completely Unknown Weights in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Setting and Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Setting," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 173-188, March.
    2. Liu, Hua-Wen & Wang, Guo-Jun, 2007. "Multi-criteria decision-making methods based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 220-233, May.
    3. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    4. Olcer, A. I. & Odabasi, A. Y., 2005. "A new fuzzy multiple attributive group decision making methodology and its application to propulsion/manoeuvring system selection problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 166(1), pages 93-114, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Binyamin YUSOFF & Jose Maria MERIGÓ & David CEBALLOS, 2017. "OWA-based Aggregation Operations in Multi-Expert MCDM Model," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 51(2), pages 211-230.

    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. Feifei Jin & Zhiwei Ni & Reza Langari & Huayou Chen, 2020. "Consistency Improvement-Driven Decision-Making Methods with Probabilistic Multiplicative Preference Relations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 371-397, April.
    2. Jian Wu, 2016. "Consistency in MCGDM Problems with Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relations Based on an Exponential Score Function," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 399-420, March.
    3. Ocampo, Lanndon & Aro, Joerabell Lourdes & Evangelista, Samantha Shane & Maturan, Fatima & Atibing, Nadine May & Yamagishi, Kafferine & Selerio, Egberto, 2023. "Synthesis of strategies in post-COVID-19 public sector supply chains under an intuitionistic fuzzy environment," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Chang, Yu-Hern, 2009. "Modeling subjective evaluation for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(2), pages 464-473, April.
    5. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    6. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    7. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    8. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    9. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    10. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    11. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    12. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    13. Kumar B, Pradeep, 2021. "Changing Objectives of Firms and Managerial Preferences: A Review of Models in Microeconomics," MPRA Paper 106967, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Mar 2021.
    14. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Anirban Mukhopadhyay & Sugata Hazra & Debasish Mitra & C. Hutton & Abhra Chanda & Sandip Mukherjee, 2016. "Characterizing the multi-risk with respect to plausible natural hazards in the Balasore coast, Odisha, India: a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) appraisal," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(3), pages 1495-1513, February.
    16. Chamoli, Sunil, 2015. "Hybrid FAHP (fuzzy analytical hierarchy process)-FTOPSIS (fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity of an ideal solution) approach for performance evaluation of the V down perforated baffle r," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 432-442.
    17. H. S. C. Perera & W. K. R. Costa, 2008. "Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Erp Software for Manufacturing Companies," Vision, , vol. 12(4), pages 1-11, October.
    18. G. La Scalia & F.P. Marra & J. Rühl & R. Sciortino & T. Caruso, 2016. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology to optimise olive agro-engineering processes based on geo-spatial technologies," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15.
    19. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2014. "Dual criteria decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 101-113.
      • Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet, 2009. "Dual Criteria Decisions," Working Papers 02-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    20. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.

    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:spr:grdene:v:25:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-015-9437-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.