Informational Paradigm, management of uncertainty and theoretical formalisms in the clustering framework: A review

Fifty years have gone by since the publication of the first paper on clustering based on fuzzy sets theory. In 1965, L.A. Zadeh had published “Fuzzy Sets” [335]. After only one year, the first effects of this seminal paper began to emerge, with the pioneering paper on clustering by Bellman, Kalaba, Zadeh [33], in which they proposed a prototypal of clustering algorithm based on the fuzzy sets theory

A GRP-basedHesitant Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision MakingMethod and Its Application to E-Commerce Risk Assessment

With respect to multiple attribute decision making (MADM) problems in which the attribute values take the form of hesitant fuzzy elements, the traditional grey relational projection (GRP) method is extended to solve multiple attribute decision making problems under hesitant fuzzy environment. Based on the hesitant fuzzy decision matrix provided by decision makers, all feasible alternatives are ranked according to the descending order of relative grey relational projections, and the most desirable alternative(s) should have the largest grey relational projection on positive ideal solution and the smallest grey relational projection on negative ideal solution. Finally, a numerical example of e-commerce risk assessment is given to illustrate the application of the proposed method

The Encyclopedia of Neutrosophic Researchers - vol. 1

This is the first volume of the Encyclopedia of Neutrosophic Researchers, edited from materials offered by the authors who responded to the editor’s invitation. The authors are listed alphabetically. The introduction contains a short history of neutrosophics, together with links to the main papers and books. Neutrosophic set, neutrosophic logic, neutrosophic probability, neutrosophic statistics, neutrosophic measure, neutrosophic precalculus, neutrosophic calculus and so on are gaining significant attention in solving many real life problems that involve uncertainty, impreciseness, vagueness, incompleteness, inconsistent, and indeterminacy. In the past years the fields of neutrosophics have been extended and applied in various fields, such as: artificial intelligence, data mining, soft computing, decision making in incomplete / indeterminate / inconsistent information systems, image processing, computational modelling, robotics, medical diagnosis, biomedical engineering, investment problems, economic forecasting, social science, humanistic and practical achievements

Algorithms for neutrosophic soft decision making based on EDAS and new similarity measure

This paper presents two novel single-valued neutrosophic soft set (SVNSS) methods.First, we initiate a new axiomatic definition of single-valued neutrosophic simlarity measure, which is expressed by single-valued neutrosophic number (SVNN) that will reduce the information loss and remain more original information

Fuzzy Techniques for Decision Making 2018

Zadeh's fuzzy set theory incorporates the impreciseness of data and evaluations, by imputting the degrees by which each object belongs to a set. Its success fostered theories that codify the subjectivity, uncertainty, imprecision, or roughness of the evaluations. Their rationale is to produce new flexible methodologies in order to model a variety of concrete decision problems more realistically. This Special Issue garners contributions addressing novel tools, techniques and methodologies for decision making (inclusive of both individual and group, single- or multi-criteria decision making) in the context of these theories. It contains 38 research articles that contribute to a variety of setups that combine fuzziness, hesitancy, roughness, covering sets, and linguistic approaches. Their ranges vary from fundamental or technical to applied approaches

A systematic review on multi-criteria group decision-making methods based on weights: analysis and classification scheme

Interest in group decision-making (GDM) has been increasing prominently over the last decade. Access to global databases, sophisticated sensors which can obtain multiple inputs or complex problems requiring opinions from several experts have driven interest in data aggregation. Consequently, the field has been widely studied from several viewpoints and multiple approaches have been proposed. Nevertheless, there is a lack of general framework. Moreover, this problem is exacerbated in the case of experts’ weighting methods, one of the most widely-used techniques to deal with multiple source aggregation. This lack of general classification scheme, or a guide to assist expert knowledge, leads to ambiguity or misreading for readers, who may be overwhelmed by the large amount of unclassified information currently available. To invert this situation, a general GDM framework is presented which divides and classifies all data aggregation techniques, focusing on and expanding the classification of experts’ weighting methods in terms of analysis type by carrying out an in-depth literature review. Results are not only classified but analysed and discussed regarding multiple characteristics, such as MCDMs in which they are applied, type of data used, ideal solutions considered or when they are applied. Furthermore, general requirements supplement this analysis such as initial influence, or component division considerations. As a result, this paper provides not only a general classification scheme and a detailed analysis of experts’ weighting methods but also a road map for researchers working on GDM topics or a guide for experts who use these methods. Furthermore, six significant contributions for future research pathways are provided in the conclusions.The first author acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Universities [grant number FPU18/01471]. The second and third author wish to recognize their support from the Serra Hunter program. Finally, this work was supported by the Catalan agency AGAUR through its research group support program (2017SGR00227). This research is part of the R&D project IAQ4EDU, reference no. PID2020-117366RB-I00, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/ 501100011033.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version