IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tjorxx/v70y2019i9p1490-1501.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making approach for alternatives evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Jian-Gang Peng
  • Guang Xia

Abstract

Given that the values of the criteria in uncertain multi-criteria group decision-making (MGDM) problems take the form of fuzzy linguistic variables, this paper proposes a model based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets (HFLTSs), named MGDM-HFLTS, to estimate investment alternatives for angel investors. To meet the challenges of complexity, lack of information and time pressure among several possible values in MGDM, the HFLTSs are introduced and revised. The HFLTSs, which are convenient and sufficiently flexible to reflect the decision-makers’ preferences, are introduced to represent the hesitation or doubt originating from systematic comparisons of the assessment values of alternatives for each criterion during both preference elicitation and alternative evaluation phases. Then, context-free grammar is revised for computing with words to enhance and extend the applicability of HFLTSs according to a set of various membership degrees over which decision-makers hesitate when eliciting their preferences over alternatives. Subsequently, the most satisfactory alternative(s) is/are determined by the outranking relationship approach to integrate the degree of preference and entropy information. In addition, studies of evaluation criteria and their weights in angel investment decision-making are investigated. An illustrative example of an angel investment implemented by the proposed MGDM-HFLTS and its corresponding algorithm confirms the effectiveness and practicability of the proposed method.

Suggested Citation

  • Jian-Gang Peng & Guang Xia, 2019. "A systematic fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making approach for alternatives evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(9), pages 1490-1501, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tjorxx:v:70:y:2019:i:9:p:1490-1501
    DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2018.1495995
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01605682.2018.1495995
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01605682.2018.1495995?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:tjorxx:v:70:y:2019:i:9:p:1490-1501. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tjor .

    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.