2018
DOI: 10.3233/jifs-172282
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Decision-making methods based on hybrid mF models

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We propose the method of mF linguistic TOPSIS for MCGDM , in which L v is the linguistic variable, i.e., appearance and M = {A m 1 , A m 2 , A m 3 , A m 4 , A m 5 } is the set of appearance of five different models, whereas V = {Less attractive, Fairly cute, Quite pretty, Very beautiful} is the set of linguistic values of appearance. Decision-makers have to evaluate the models on the basis of the linguistic values of their appearance and they have to design a physical domain in which appearance takes its quantitative values, i.e., P d = [10,100]. The physical domain for linguistic values of appearance is given as follows: The physical domain of each linguistic value shows the range of marks given by a group of decision-makers out of 100.…”
Section: Models Ranking According To Their Appearancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We propose the method of mF linguistic TOPSIS for MCGDM , in which L v is the linguistic variable, i.e., appearance and M = {A m 1 , A m 2 , A m 3 , A m 4 , A m 5 } is the set of appearance of five different models, whereas V = {Less attractive, Fairly cute, Quite pretty, Very beautiful} is the set of linguistic values of appearance. Decision-makers have to evaluate the models on the basis of the linguistic values of their appearance and they have to design a physical domain in which appearance takes its quantitative values, i.e., P d = [10,100]. The physical domain for linguistic values of appearance is given as follows: The physical domain of each linguistic value shows the range of marks given by a group of decision-makers out of 100.…”
Section: Models Ranking According To Their Appearancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Akram and Adeel [9] introduced novel hybrid decision-making methods based on mF rough information. Further, Akram et al [10] worked on decision-making methods based on hybrid mF models. Furthermore, Akram [11] introduced many new concepts including mF graphs, mF line graphs, mF labeling graphs and certain metrics in mF graphs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concept of HFS and IHFS are extensively used in many problems such as Mahmood et al [18] worked on the generalised aggregation operators for Cubic HFSs, Ullah et al [19] introduced bipolar-valued HFSs, Farhadinia [20] developed the concept of information measures for HFSs and interval-valued HFSs and Zhai et al [21] utilised measures of probabilistic interval-valued IHFSs and the application in reducing excessive medical examinations. Some other work in these fields, we may refer to [22][23][24][25][26]. Recently, Wang et al [27] developed the concept of PHFS and its application in multi-attribute decision making are examined.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generalized approximations in (∈, ∈ ∨q)-fuzzy ideals in quantales was proposed by Shabir (2018c, 2019). Some decision-making methods related to hesitant fuzzy sets and graph theory, also hybrid mF models, can be seen in (Akram et al 2018;Naz and Akram 2019). Molodtsov (1999) presented the soft set theory to overcome the difficulties mostly related to economics, medicine, environment, engineering and social sciences.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%