4.8 Article

Extensions of Atanassov's Intuitionistic Fuzzy Interaction Bonferroni Means and Their Application to Multiple-Attribute Decision Making

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS
卷 24, 期 3, 页码 558-573

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2015.2460750

关键词

Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy sets (AIFSs); admissible orders; different preference attitudes; multiple-attribute decision making; the extended weighted interaction Bonferroni mean

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71225006, 71532008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Bonferroni mean (BM) was originally presented by Bonferroni and had been generalized by many researchers on Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy sets (AIFSs) for its capacity to capture the interrelationship between input arguments. Nevertheless, the forms of the combinations of the newly proposed interaction theory on AIFSs with BM are very single, and the existing BMs on AIFSs are not consistent with aggregation operations on the ordinary fuzzy sets. As complements to the existing generalizations of BM under Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy environment, this paper develops the extended Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy interaction Bonferroni mean (EIFIBM) and the extended weighted Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy interaction Bonferroni mean, which can evolve into a series of BMs by taking different generator functions that reflect the different preference attitudes of the decision makers. In addition, some of the EIFIBMs are consistent with aggregation operations on the ordinary fuzzy sets, and some of the EIFIBMs consider the interactions between the membership and nonmembership functions of different Atanassov's intuitionistic fuzzy sets; thus, they can be used in more decision situations. We investigate the properties of these new extensions and apply them to multiple-attribute decision-making problems with admissible orders. Finally, numerical examples show the validity and feasibility of the new approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据