2020
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-50417-5_47
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A New Coefficient of Rankings Similarity in Decision-Making Problems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
92
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 170 publications
(130 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
92
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…With the use of aggregation operators and other fuzzy techniques, it is possible to generate new scenarios based on the expertise and expectations of the decision makers. Additionally, the use of different coefficients to test the similarity between the rankings will be useful to compare rankings in decision-making fields [54]. Finally, these new techniques can be applied in different areas such as economics, finance, engineering, social science and other areas [55] where the idea and characteristics of fuzzy logic and fuzzy sets can be used [56,57].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With the use of aggregation operators and other fuzzy techniques, it is possible to generate new scenarios based on the expertise and expectations of the decision makers. Additionally, the use of different coefficients to test the similarity between the rankings will be useful to compare rankings in decision-making fields [54]. Finally, these new techniques can be applied in different areas such as economics, finance, engineering, social science and other areas [55] where the idea and characteristics of fuzzy logic and fuzzy sets can be used [56,57].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although some barriers on using the fuzzy BWM are observed, the advantages on conducting a smaller number of pairwise comparisons outweigh the drawbacks. In addition, to compare them qualitatively, the evaluations of weighted spearman's rank correlation coefficient (r ω ) and rank similarity coefficient (WS) are conducted to examine the ranking performance between the fuzzy BWM and fuzzy AHP [31], as in Equations (14) and (15). R xi and R yi represent the expected and estimated ranking results at alternative i, respectively, while N denotes the total number of alternatives.…”
Section: Comparisons With Using Fuzzy Ahpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The assumption is proposed here that the positive and negative ideal solutions equal the optimal and worst values correspondingly, as described in Equations (17) and (18).…”
Section: Comprehensive Evaluation Based On Interval Type-ii Fuzzy Ahpmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Modern intelligent techniques principally consist of an artificial neural network (ANN), a support vector machine (SVM), the least-squares support vector machine (LSSVM), and so on [16]. Due to the mature theory and accurate calculation of traditional evaluation methods and the quick processing capability of intelligent algorithms [17][18][19], this study has established a combined assessment approach where interval type-II fuzzy integrated with the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is employed for index weight determination, and technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) is applied for comprehensive estimation and ranking. With regard to intelligent evaluation techniques, an ANN is confronted with slow convergence speed and easily falls into a local optimum [20].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%