Decision making with Dempster-Shafer belief structure and the OWAWA operator

[EN] A new decision making model that uses the weighted average and the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator in the Dempster-Shafer belief structure is presented. Thus, we are able to represent the decision making problem considering objective and subjective information and the attitudinal character of the decision maker. For doing so, we use the ordered weighted averaging ¿ weighted average (OWAWA) operator. It is an aggregation operator that unifies the weighted average and the OWA in the same formulation. This approach is generalized by using quasi-arithmetic means and group decision making techniques. An application of the new approach in a group decision making problem concerning political management of a country is also developed.We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for valuable comments that have improved the quality of the paper. Support from the Spanish Ministry of Education under project JC2009-00189 , the University of Barcelona (099311) and the European Commission (PIEFGA-2011-300062) is gratefully acknowledgedMerigó, JM.; Engemann, KJ.; Palacios Marqués, D. (2013). Decision making with Dempster-Shafer belief structure and the OWAWA operator. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 19(sup 1):S100-S118. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2013.869517SS100S11819sup 1Antuchevičienė, J., Zavadskas, E. K., & Zakarevičius, A. (2010). MULTIPLE CRITERIA CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT DECISIONS CONSIDERING RELATIONS BETWEEN CRITERIA / DAUGIATIKSLIAI STATYBOS VALDYMO SPRENDIMAI ATSIŽVELGIANT Į RODIKLIŲ TARPUSAVIO PRIKLAUSOMYBĘ. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 109-125. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.07Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). PROJECT MANAGEMENT BY MULTIMOORA AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR TRANSITION ECONOMIES / PROJEKTŲ VADYBA SU MULTIMOORA KAIP PRIEMONĖ PEREINAMOJO LAIKOTARPIO ŪKIAMS. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 5-24. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.01Dempster, A. P. (1967). Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 38(2), 325-339. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177698950ENGEMANN, K. J., MILLER, H. E., & YAGER, R. R. (1996). DECISION MAKING WITH BELIEF STRUCTURES: AN APPLICATION IN RISK MANAGEMENT. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 04(01), 1-25. doi:10.1142/s0218488596000020ENGEMANN, K. J., FILEV, D. P., & YAGER, R. R. (1996). MODELLING DECISION MAKING USING IMMEDIATE PROBABILITIES. International Journal of General Systems, 24(3), 281-294. doi:10.1080/03081079608945123Engemann, K. J., & Miller, H. E. (2009). Critical infrastructure and smart technology risk modelling using computational intelligence. International Journal of Business Continuity and Risk Management, 1(1), 91. doi:10.1504/ijbcrm.2009.028953Fodor, J., Marichal, J.-L., & Roubens, M. (1995). Characterization of the ordered weighted averaging operators. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 3(2), 236-240. doi:10.1109/91.388176Han, Z., & Liu, P. (2011). A FUZZY MULTI-ATTRIBUTE DECISION-MAKING METHOD UNDER RISK WITH UNKNOWN ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTS / NERAIŠKUSIS MAŽESNĖS RIZIKOS DAUGIATIKSLIS SPRENDIMŲ PRIĖMIMO METODAS SU NEŽINOMAIS PRISKIRIAMAIS REIKŠMINGUMAIS. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(2), 246-258. doi:10.3846/20294913.2011.580575Keršulienė, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). SELECTION OF RATIONAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION METHOD BY APPLYING NEW STEP‐WISE WEIGHT ASSESSMENT RATIO ANALYSIS (SWARA). Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(2), 243-258. doi:10.3846/jbem.2010.12Liu, P. (2009). MULTI‐ATTRIBUTE DECISION‐MAKING METHOD RESEARCH BASED ON INTERVAL VAGUE SET AND TOPSIS METHOD. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 15(3), 453-463. doi:10.3846/1392-8619.2009.15.453-463Liu, P. (2011). A weighted aggregation operators multi-attribute group decision-making method based on interval-valued trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(1), 1053-1060. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.144Merigó, J. M. (2011). A unified model between the weighted average and the induced OWA operator. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 11560-11572. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.034Merigó, J. M. (2012). The probabilistic weighted average and its application in multiperson decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 27(5), 457-476. doi:10.1002/int.21531Merigó, J. M., & Casanovas, M. (2009). Induced aggregation operators in decision making with the Dempster-Shafer belief structure. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 24(8), 934-954. doi:10.1002/int.20368Merigó, J. M., & Casanovas, M. (2010). The uncertain induced quasi-arithmetic OWA operator. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 26(1), 1-24. doi:10.1002/int.20444MERIGÓ, J. M., & CASANOVAS, M. (2011). THE UNCERTAIN GENERALIZED OWA OPERATOR AND ITS APPLICATION TO FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 10(02), 211-230. doi:10.1142/s0219622011004300MERIGÓ, J. M., CASANOVAS, M., & MARTÍNEZ, L. (2010). LINGUISTIC AGGREGATION OPERATORS FOR LINGUISTIC DECISION MAKING BASED ON THE DEMPSTER-SHAFER THEORY OF EVIDENCE. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 18(03), 287-304. doi:10.1142/s0218488510006544MERIGO, J., & GILLAFUENTE, A. (2009). The induced generalized OWA operator. Information Sciences, 179(6), 729-741. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2008.11.013Merigó, J. M., & Gil-Lafuente, A. M. (2010). New decision-making techniques and their application in the selection of financial products. Information Sciences, 180(11), 2085-2094. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.01.028Merigó, J. M., & Wei, G. (2011). PROBABILISTIC AGGREGATION OPERATORS AND THEIR APPLICATION IN UNCERTAIN MULTI-PERSON DECISION-MAKING / TIKIMYBINIAI SUMAVIMO OPERATORIAI IR JŲ TAIKYMAS PRIIMANT GRUPINIUS SPRENDIMUS NEAPIBRĖŽTOJE APLINKOJE. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(2), 335-351. doi:10.3846/20294913.2011.584961Podvezko, V. (2009). Application of AHP technique. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 10(2), 181-189. doi:10.3846/1611-1699.2009.10.181-189Reformat, M., & Yager, R. R. (2007). Building ensemble classifiers using belief functions and OWA operators. Soft Computing, 12(6), 543-558. doi:10.1007/s00500-007-0227-2Srivastava, R. P., & Mock, T. J. (Eds.). (2002). Belief Functions in Business Decisions. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing. doi:10.1007/978-3-7908-1798-0Torra, V. (1997). The weighted OWA operator. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 12(2), 153-166. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-111x(199702)12:23.0.co;2-pWei, G.-W. (2011). Some generalized aggregating operators with linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 61(1), 32-38. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2011.02.007Wei, G., Zhao, X., & Lin, R. (2010). Some Induced Aggregating Operators with Fuzzy Number Intuitionistic Fuzzy Information and their Applications to Group Decision Making. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 3(1), 84-95. doi:10.1080/18756891.2010.9727679Xu, Z. (2005). An overview of methods for determining OWA weights. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 20(8), 843-865. doi:10.1002/int.20097Xu, Z. (2009). A Deviation-Based Approach to Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 19(1), 57-76. doi:10.1007/s10726-009-9164-zXu, Z. S., & Da, Q. L. (2003). An overview of operators for aggregating information. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 18(9), 953-969. doi:10.1002/int.10127Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18(1), 183-190. doi:10.1109/21.87068YAGER, R. R. (1992). DECISION MAKING UNDER DEMPSTER-SHAFER UNCERTAINTIES. International Journal of General Systems, 20(3), 233-245. doi:10.1080/03081079208945033Yager, R. R. (1993). Families of OWA operators. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 59(2), 125-148. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(93)90194-mYager, R. R. (1998). Including importances in OWA aggregations using fuzzy systems modeling. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 6(2), 286-294. doi:10.1109/91.669028Yager, R. R. (2004). Generalized OWA Aggregation Operators. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 3(1), 93-107. doi:10.1023/b:fodm.0000013074.68765.97Yager, R. R., Engemann, K. J., & Filev, D. P. (1995). On the concept of immediate probabilities. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 10(4), 373-397. doi:10.1002/int.4550100403Yager, R. R., & Kacprzyk, J. (Eds.). (1997). The Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators. doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-6123-1Yager, R. R., Kacprzyk, J., & Beliakov, G. (Eds.). (2011). Recent Developments in the Ordered Weighted Averaging Operators: Theory and Practice. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-17910-5Yager, R. R., & Liu, L. (Eds.). (2008). Classic Works of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Belief Functions. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-44792-4Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011). MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING (MCDM) METHODS IN ECONOMICS: AN OVERVIEW / DAUGIATIKSLIAI SPRENDIMŲ PRIĖMIMO METODAI EKONOMIKOJE: APŽVALGA. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(2), 397-427. doi:10.3846/20294913.2011.593291Zavadskas, E. K., Vilutienė, T., Turskis, Z., & Tamosaitienė, J. (2010). CONTRACTOR SELECTION FOR CONSTRUCTION WORKS BY APPLYING SAW‐G AND TOPSIS GREY TECHNIQUES. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11(1), 34-55. doi:10.3846/jbem.2010.03Zeng, S., & Su, W. (2011). Intuitionistic fuzzy ordered weighted distance operator. Knowledge-Based Systems, 24(8), 1224-1232. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2011.05.013Zhang, X., & Liu, P. (2010). METHOD FOR AGGREGATING TRIANGULAR FUZZY INTUITIONISTIC FUZZY INFORMATION AND ITS APPLICATION TO DECISION MAKING / NUMANOMŲ NEAPIBRĖŽTŲJŲ AIBIŲ TEORIJA IR JOS TAIKYMAS PRIIMANT SPRENDIMUS. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 280-290. doi:10.3846/tede.2010.18Zhao, H., Xu, Z., Ni, M., & Liu, S. (2010). Generalized aggregation operators for intuitionistic fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 25(1), 1-30. doi:10.1002/int.20386Zhou, L.-G., & Chen, H. (2010). Generalized ordered weighted logarithm aggregation operators and their applications to group decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/int.20419Zhou, L.-G., & Chen, H.-Y. (2011). Continuous generalized OWA operator and its application to decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 168(1), 18-34. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2010.05.009Zhou, L., & Chen, H. (2012). A generalization of the power aggregation operators for linguistic environment and its application in group decision making. Knowledge-Based Systems, 26, 216-224. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2011.08.004Zhou, L., Chen, H., & Liu, J. (2011). Generalized Multiple Averaging Operators and their Applications to Group Decision Making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 22(2), 331-358. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9267-1Zhou, L., Chen, H., & Liu, J. (2012). Generalized power aggregation operators and their applications in group decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62(4), 989-999. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2011.12.025Zhou, L.-G., Chen, H.-Y., Merigó, J. M., & Gil-Lafuente, A. M. (2012). Uncertain generalized aggregation operators. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 1105-1117. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.11

Water Policies and Conflict Resolution of Public Participation Decision-Making Processes Using Prioritized Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) Operators

[EN] There is a growing interest in environmental policies about how to implement public participation engagement in the context of water resources management. This paper presents a robust methodology, based on ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators, to conflict resolution decision-making problems under uncertain environments due to both information and stakeholders' preferences. The methodology allows integrating heterogeneous interests of the general public and stakeholders on account of their different degree of acceptance or preference and level of influence or power regarding the measures and policies to be adopted, and also of their level of involvement (i.e., information supply, consultation and active involvement). These considerations lead to different environmental and socio-economic outcomes, and levels of stakeholders' satisfaction. The methodology establishes a prioritization relationship over the stakeholders. The individual stakeholders' preferences are aggregated through their associated weights, which depend on the satisfaction of the higher priority decision maker. The methodology ranks the optimal management strategies to maximize the stakeholders' satisfaction. It has been successfully applied to a real case study, providing greater fairness, transparency, social equity and consensus among actors. Furthermore, it provides support to environmental policies, such as the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), improving integrated water management while covering a wide range of objectives, management alternatives and stakeholders.Llopis Albert, C.; Merigó-Lindahl, JM.; Liao, H.; Xu, Y.; Grima-Olmedo, J.; Grima-Olmedo, C. (2018). Water Policies and Conflict Resolution of Public Participation Decision-Making Processes Using Prioritized Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA) Operators. Water Resources Management. 32(2):497-510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1823-2S497510322Amin GR, Sadeghi H (2010) Application of prioritized aggregation operators in preference voting. Int J Intell Syst 25(10):1027–1034Chen TY (2014) A prioritized aggregation operator-based approach to multiple criteria decision making using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets: A comparative perspective. Inf Sci 281:97–112Chen LH, Xu ZS (2014) A prioritized aggregation operator based on the OWA operator and prioritized measures. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27:1297–1307Chen LH, Xu ZS, Yu XH (2014a) Prioritized measure-guided aggregation operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22:1127–1138Chen LH, Xu ZS, Yu XH (2014b) Weakly prioritized measure aggregation in prioritized multicriteria decision making. Int J Intell Syst 29:439–461CHJ (2016). Júcar river basin authority http://www.chj.es/CHS (2016). Segura river basin authority http://www.chsegura.es/Dong JY, Wan SP (2016) A new method for prioritized multi-criteria group decision making with triangular intuitionistic fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30:1719–1733EC (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 23 2000 Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, L327/1eL327/72 22.12.2000Jackson S, Tan P-L, Nolan S (2012) Tools to enhance public participation and confidence in the development of the Howard East aquifer water plan, Northern Territory. J Hydrol 474:22–28Jin FF, Ni ZW, Chen HY (2016) Note on “Hesitant fuzzy prioritized operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making”. Knowl-Based Syst 96:115–119Kentel E, Aral MM (2007) Fuzzy Multiobjective Decision-Making Approach for Groundwater Resources Management. J Hydrol Eng 12(2):206–217. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2007)12:2(206).Kirchherr J, Charles KJ, Walton MJ (2016) Multi-causal pathways of public opposition to dam project in Asia: A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Glob Environ Chang 41:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.08.001Llopis-Albert C, Pulido-Velazquez D (2015) Using MODFLOW code to approach transient hydraulic head with a sharp-interface solution. Hydrol Process 29(8):2052–2064. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10354Llopis-Albert C, Palacios-Marqués D, Soto-Acosta P (2015) Decision-making and stakeholders constructive participation in environmental projects. J Bus Res 68:1641–1644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.02.010Llopis-Albert C, Merigó JM, Xu Y, Huchang L (2017) Improving regional climate projections by prioritized aggregation via ordered weighted averaging operators. Environ Eng Sci. https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2016.0546Maia R (2017) The WFD Implementation in the European Member States. Water Resour Manag 31(10):3043–3060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-017-1723-5Malczewski J, Chapman T, Flegel C, Walters D, Shrubsole D, Healy MA (2003) GIS - multicriteria evaluation with ordered weighted averaging (OWA): case study of developing watershed management strategies. Environ Plan A 35:1769–1784. https://doi.org/10.1068/a35156Merigó JM, Casanovas M (2011) The uncertain generalized owa operator and its application to financial decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 10(2):211–230Merigó JM, Yager RR (2013) Generalized moving averages, distance measures and OWA operators. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 21(4):533–559Merigó JM, Palacios-Marqués D, Ribeiro-Navarrete B (2015) Aggregation systems for sales forecasting. J Bus Res 68:2299–2304Mesiar R, Stupnanová A, Yager RR (2015) Generalizations of OWA Operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(6):2154–2162O’Hagan M (1988) Aggregating Template Rule Antecedents in Real-time Expert Systems with Fuzzy Set Logic. In: Proceedings of 22nd annual IEEE Asilomar Conference on Signals. IEEE and Maple Press, Pacific Grove, Systems and Computers, pp 681–689Rahmani MA, Zarghami M (2013) A new approach to combine climate change projections by ordered weighting averaging operator; applications to northwestern provinces of Iran. Glob Planet Chang 102:41–50Ran LG, Wei GW (2015) Uncertain prioritized operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Technol Econ Dev Econ 21:118–139Ruiz-Villaverde, A., García-Rubio, M.A. (2017). Public Participation in European Water Management: from Theory to Practice. Water Resour Manag 31(8), 2479–2495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1355-1Sadiq R, Tesfamariam S (2007) Probability density functions based weights for ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators: An example of water quality indices. Eur J Oper Res 182:1350–1368Sadiq R, Rodríguez MJ, Tesfamariam S (2010) Integrating indicators for performance assessment of small water utilities using ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operators. Expert Syst Appl 37:4881–4891Verma R, Sharma B (2016) Prioritized information fusion method for triangular fuzzy information and its application to multiple attribute decision making. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 24:265–290Wang HM, Xu YJ, Merigó JM (2014) Prioritized aggregation for non-homogeneous group decision making in water resource management. Econ Comput Econ Cybern Stud Res 48(1):247–258Wei GW (2012) Hesitant fuzzy prioritized operators. Knowl-Based Syst 31:176–182Wei CP, Tang XJ (2012) Generalized prioritized aggregation operators. Int J Intell Syst 27:578–589Xu ZS (2005) An Overview of Methods for Determining OWA Weights. Int J Intell Syst 20:843–865Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making, IEEE Transactions on Systems. Man Cybern B 18(1988):183–190Yager RR (2008) Prioritized Aggregation Operators. Int J Approx Reason 48:263–274Yan H-B, Huynh V-N, Nakamori Y, Murai T (2011) On prioritized weighted aggregation in multi-criteria decision making. Expert Syst Appl 38(1):812–823Ye J (2014) Prioritized aggregation operators of trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their application to multicriteria decision-making. Neural Comput & Applic 25:1447–1454Yu XH, Xu ZS, Liu SS (2013) Prioritized multi-criteria decision making based on preference relations. Comput Ind Eng 66:104–115Zadeh LA (1983) A Computational Approach to Fuzzy Quantifiers in Natural Languages. Comput Math Appl 9:149–184Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F (2009) Revising the OWA operator for multi criteria decision making problems under uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res 198:259–265Zarghami M, Ardakanian R, Memariani A, Szidarovszky F (2008) Extended OWA Operator for Group Decision Making on Water Resources Projects. J Water Resour Plan Manag 134(3):266–275. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2008)134:3(266)Zarghami M, Szidarovszky F, Ardakanian R (2009) Multi-attribute decision making on inter-basin water transfer projects. Transaction E. Ind Eng 16(1):73–80Zhao XF, Li QX, Wei GW (2014) Some prioritized aggregating operators with linguistic information and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:1619–1630Zhao N, Xu ZS, Ren ZL (2016) On typical hesitant fuzzy prioritized “or” operator in multi-attribute decision making. Int J Intell Syst 31:73–100Zhou LY, Lin R, Zhao XF, Wei GW (2013) Uncertain linguistic prioritized aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute group decision making. Int J Uncertain, Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 21:603–627Zhou LG, Merigó JM, Chen HY, Liu JP (2016) The optimal group continuous logarithm compatibility measure for interval multiplicative preference relations based on the COWGA operator. Inf Sci 328:250–26

Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making

In this paper, we investigate the multiple attribute decision making problems with Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic information. Then, we utilize power average and power geometric operations to develop some Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power aggregation operators: Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power weighted average (P2TLPWA) operator, Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power weighted geometric (P2TLPWG) operator, Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power ordered weighted average (P2TLPOWA) operator, Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power ordered weighted geometric (P2TLPOWG) operator, Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power hybrid average (P2TLPHA) operator and Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic power hybrid geometric (P2TLPHG) operator. The prominent characteristic of these proposed operators are studied. Then, we have utilized these operators to develop some approaches to solve the Pythagorean 2-tuple linguistic multiple attribute decision making problems. Finally, a practical example for enterprise resource planning (ERP) system selection is given to verify the developed approach and to demonstrate its practicality and effectiveness

Aggregation operators in group decision making: Identifying citation classics via H-classics

To analyze the past, present and future of a particular research field, classic papers are usually studied because they identify the highly cited papers being a relevant reference point in that specific research area. As a result of the possible mapping between high quality research and high citation counts, highly cited papers are very interesting. The objective of this study is to use the H-classics method, which is based on the popular h-index, to identify and analyze the highly cited documents published about aggregation operators in the research area of group decision making. According to the H-classics method, this research area is represented by 87 citation classics, which have been published from 1988 to 2014. Authors, affiliations (universities/institutions and countries), journals, books and conferences, and the topics covered by these 87 highly cited papers are studied.The authors would like to thank FEDER financial support from the Projects TIN2013-40658-P and TIN2016- 75850-P

Managing Interacting Criteria: Application to Environmental Evaluation Practices

The need for organizations to evaluate their environmental practices has been recently increasing. This fact has led to the development of many approaches to appraise such practices. In this paper, a novel decision model to evaluate company’s environmental practices is proposed to improve traditional evaluation process in different facets. Firstly, different reviewers’ collectives related to the company’s activity are taken into account in the process to increase company internal efficiency and external legitimacy. Secondly, following the standard ISO 14031, two general categories of environmental performance indicators, management and operational, are considered. Thirdly, since the assumption of independence among environmental indicators is rarely verified in environmental context, an aggregation operator to bear in mind the relationship among such indicators in the evaluation results is proposed. Finally, this new model integrates quantitative and qualitative information with different scales using a multi-granular linguistic model that allows to adapt diverse evaluation scales according to appraisers’ knowledge

Using Fuzzy Linguistic Representations to Provide Explanatory Semantics for Data Warehouses

A data warehouse integrates large amounts of extracted and summarized data from multiple sources for direct querying and analysis. While it provides decision makers with easy access to such historical and aggregate data, the real meaning of the data has been ignored. For example, "whether a total sales amount 1,000 items indicates a good or bad sales performance" is still unclear. From the decision makers' point of view, the semantics rather than raw numbers which convey the meaning of the data is very important. In this paper, we explore the use of fuzzy technology to provide this semantics for the summarizations and aggregates developed in data warehousing systems. A three layered data warehouse semantic model, consisting of quantitative (numerical) summarization, qualitative (categorical) summarization, and quantifier summarization, is proposed for capturing and explicating the semantics of warehoused data. Based on the model, several algebraic operators are defined. We also extend the SQL language to allow for flexible queries against such enhanced data warehouses

An Extended TODIM Method for Group Decision Making with the Interval Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets

For a multiple-attribute group decision-making problem with interval intuitionistic fuzzy sets, a method based on extended TODIM is proposed. First, the concepts of interval intuitionistic fuzzy set and its algorithms are defined, and then the entropy method to determine the weights is put forward. Then, based on the Hamming distance and the Euclidean distance of the interval intuitionistic fuzzy set, both of which have been defined, function mapping is given for the attribute. Finally, to solve multiple-attribute group decision-making problems using interval intuitionistic fuzzy sets, a method based on extended TODIM is put forward, and a case that deals with the site selection of airport terminals is given to prove the method