Ranking of Alternatives Described by Atanassov’s Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets – Reconciling Some Misunderstandings

Author:

Szmidt Eulalia12ORCID,Kacprzyk Janusz12ORCID,Bujnowski Paweł1ORCID,Starczewski Janusz T.3ORCID,Siwocha Agnieszka4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences ul . Newelska 6 , Warsaw , Poland

2. WIT Academy ul. Newelska 6 , Warsaw , Poland

3. Department of Intelligent Computer Systems , Częstochowa University of Technology Al . Armii Krajowej 36 , Częstochowa , Poland

4. Information Technology Institute , University of Social Sciences , Łódź , Poland

Abstract

Abstract Atanassov’s intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFSs) are a very convenient tool for describing alternatives/options while making decisions because they make it possible to naturally represent the pros, cons, and hesitation. The IFSs have attracted a significant interest and have been applied in various fields. Of course, their use poses some challenges. One of the main challenges is the ranking of alternatives/options described by the intuitionistic fuzzy sets, to be called for brevity the intuitionistic fuzzy alternatives. This is a crucial issue, notably for the applications, for instance, in decision making. We first present in detail and analyze the benefits of a method we introduced previously (cf. Szmidt and Kacprzyk [1]). For this method, we augment the original assumptions with an additional assumption, which is justified and inherently reasonable. As a result, we obtain formulas which are better justified than those previously used as they explicitly consider the arguments in favor (pro), against (con), and hesitance. Since the intuitionistic fuzzy alternatives can not be linearly ranked, then the additional assumptions during the ranking process are necessary. We address these issues and analyze examples to clarify our new approach. We examine some other methods discussed in the literature and analyze their results, and show that the new assumptions reconcile some misconceptions raised by those other papers.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3