2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.asoc.2011.02.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approaches based on 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators for multiple attribute group decision making under linguistic environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
83
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 170 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
83
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It provides a parameterized family of aggregation operators that include as special cases the maximum, the minimum and the average [28]. Motivated by the idea of the OWA operator, Xu and Wang [29] developed the 2-tuple linguistic power ordered weighted averaging (2TLPOWA) operator, which can take all the decision arguments and their relationships into account. Jiang and Fan [30] proposed the 2-tuple ordered weighted geometric (TOWG) operator on the basis of the 2-tuple OWA operator.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It provides a parameterized family of aggregation operators that include as special cases the maximum, the minimum and the average [28]. Motivated by the idea of the OWA operator, Xu and Wang [29] developed the 2-tuple linguistic power ordered weighted averaging (2TLPOWA) operator, which can take all the decision arguments and their relationships into account. Jiang and Fan [30] proposed the 2-tuple ordered weighted geometric (TOWG) operator on the basis of the 2-tuple OWA operator.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much work has been completed using the fuzzy linguistic approach and the 2-tuple model in many situations: distributed agents [16], genetic learning [17], industrial engineering [18], multicriteria decision-making [19], fuzzy decision tools [20], human resource management [21], and so forth.…”
Section: Computing With Words and Fuzzy Logicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the recent years, a variety of linguistic aggregation operators have been developed. Xu 23 classified these linguistic aggregation operators into five categories: (1) the linguistic aggregation operators which are based on linear ordering, such as the linguistic max and min operators 26,27,28,29,30 , linguistic median operator 28,29,30 , linguistic weighted median opera-tor 28,29,30 ; (2) the linguistic aggregation operators which are based on the extension principle, such as linguistic OWA operator 1,2,12 , inverse-LOWA operator 3 , linguistic weighted OWA operator 13 , these operators make computations on the fuzzy numbers that support the semantics of the linguistic labels; (3) the linguistic aggregation operators which are based on symbols 4,7 , these operators make computations on the indexes of the linguistic labels; (4) the linguistic aggregation operators which are based on the 2-tuple linguistic representation model, such as 2-tuple arithmetic mean operator 5,6 , 2-tuple OWA operator 5,8,9 , 2-tuple weighted geometric averaging (TWGA) operator 22 , 2-tuple ordered weighted geometric averaging (TOWGA) operator 22 ; (5) the linguistic aggregation operators which compute with words directly, such as extended ordered weighted averaging (EOWA) operator 16 , uncertain linguistic ordered weighted operator 10,11,17 , induced uncertain linguistic OWA operator 14,18 . For the linguistic aggregation operators in (1) − (3), the results usually do not match any of the initial linguistic terms and some approximation processes must be developed to express the results in the initial expression domain, which produces the loss of information and the lack of precision.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%