Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Volume 2016, Article ID 6145196, 14 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/6145196
Research Article

A Modified TOPSIS Method Based on Numbers and Its Applications in Human Resources Selection

1School of Computer and Information Science, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China
2Big Data Decision Institute, Jinan University, Tianhe, Guangzhou 510632, China
3Institute of Integrated Automation, School of Electronic and Information Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi 710049, China
4School of Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235, USA

Received 29 February 2016; Accepted 28 April 2016

Academic Editor: Rita Gamberini

Copyright © 2016 Liguo Fei et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. A. Mardani, A. Jusoh, and E. K. Zavadskas, “Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications—two decades review from 1994 to 2014,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 4126–4148, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. W. Pedrycz, R. Al-Hmouz, A. Morfeq, and A. S. Balamash, “Building granular fuzzy decision support systems,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 58, pp. 3–10, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. Bandyopadhyay and R. Bhattacharya, “Finding optimum neighbor for routing based on multi-criteria, multi-agent and fuzzy approach,” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 25–42, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. S. Yao and W.-Q. Huang, “Induced ordered weighted evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis with uncertainty,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 906–925, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. F. Lolli, A. Ishizaka, R. Gamberini, B. Rimini, and M. Messori, “FlowSort-GDSS—a novel group multi-criteria decision support system for sorting problems with application to FMEA,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 17-18, pp. 6342–6349, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. J. P. Evans and R. E. Steuer, “A revised simplex method for linear multiple objective programs,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 54–72, 1973. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  7. P. L. Yu and M. Zeleny, “The set of all nondominated solutions in linear cases and a multicriteria simplex method,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 430–468, 1975. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  8. G. W. Torrance, “Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs,” Health Services Research, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 328, 1978. View at Google Scholar
  9. J. Rezaei, “Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method,” Omega, vol. 53, pp. 49–57, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. W. Sałabun, “The characteristic objects method: a new distance-based approach to multicriteria decision-making problems,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, vol. 22, no. 1-2, pp. 37–50, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. E. K. Zavadskas, J. Antucheviciene, S. H. R. Hajiagha, and S. S. Hashemi, “The interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy MULTIMOORA method for group decision making in engineering,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 560690, 13 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. W. Jiang, Y. Luo, X.-Y. Qin, and J. Zhan, “An improved method to rank generalized fuzzy numbers with different left heights and right heights,” Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 2343–2355, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. G. Lee, K. S. Jun, and E.-S. Chung, “Robust spatial flood vulnerability assessment for Han River using fuzzy TOPSIS with cut level set,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 644–654, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. D. Liang, W. Pedrycz, D. Liu, and P. Hu, “Three-way decisions based on decision-theoretic rough sets under linguistic assessment with the aid of group decision making,” Applied Soft Computing Journal, vol. 29, pp. 256–269, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. B. L. Golden, E. A. Wasil, and P. T. Harker, Analytic Hierarchy Process, vol. 113, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2003.
  16. H. Nguyen, S. Z. M. Dawal, Y. Nukman, H. Aoyama, K. Case, and Y. Deng, “An integrated approach of fuzzy linguistic preference based AHP and fuzzy COPRAS for machine tool evaluation,” PLOS ONE, vol. 10, no. 9, article e0133599, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. Y. Deng, “Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process based on canonical representation on fuzzy numbers,” Journal of Computational Analysis and Applications, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 201–228, 2017. View at Google Scholar
  18. E. K. Zavadskas, J. Antucheviciene, Z. Turskis, and H. Adeli, “Hybrid multiple criteria decision making methods: a review of applications in engineering,” Scientia Iranica, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1–20, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  19. C. L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1981.
  20. S. M. Mousavi, S. A. Torabi, and R. Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, “A hierarchical group decision-making approach for new product selection in a fuzzy environment,” Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 3233–3248, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. Z. Yue, “TOPSIS-based group decision-making methodology in intuitionistic fuzzy setting,” Information Sciences, vol. 277, pp. 141–153, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  22. A. Suder and C. Kahraman, “Minimizing environmental risks using fuzzy topsis: location selection for the itu faculty of management,” Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1326–1340, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. M. H. Ahmadi, M. A. Ahmadi, and S. A. Sadatsakkak, “Thermodynamic analysis and performance optimization of irreversible Carnot refrigerator by using multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs),” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 51, article 4609, pp. 1055–1070, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. B. Vahdani, S. M. Mousavi, R. Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, and H. Hashemi, “A new design of the elimination and choice translating reality method for multi-criteria group decision-making in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 1781–1799, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  25. M. Xia and Z. Xu, “A novel method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision making,” International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 497–519, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. K. Khalili-Damghani, S. Sadi-Nezhad, and M. Tavana, “Solving multi-period project selection problems with fuzzy goal programming based on {TOPSIS} and a fuzzy preference relation,” Information Sciences, vol. 252, pp. 42–61, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  27. Y. Kim, E.-S. Chung, S.-M. Jun, and S. U. Kim, “Prioritizing the best sites for treated wastewater instream use in an urban watershed using fuzzy TOPSIS,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 73, pp. 23–32, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. E. K. Zavadskas, Z. Turskis, and V. Bagočius, “Multi-criteria selection of a deep-water port in the Eastern Baltic Sea,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 26, pp. 180–192, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. G. Lee, K. S. Jun, and E.-S. Chung, “Group decision-making approach for flood vulnerability identification using the fuzzy VIKOR method,” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 863–874, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. S. Dadelo, Z. Turskis, E. K. Zavadskas, and R. Dadeliene, “Multi-criteria assessment and ranking system of sport team formation based on objective-measured values of criteria set,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 14, pp. 6106–6113, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. S.-M. Yu, H. Zhou, X.-H. Chen, and J.-Q. Wang, “A multi-criteria decision-making method based on Heronian mean operators under a linguistic hesitant fuzzy environment,” Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, vol. 32, no. 5, article 1550035, Article ID 1550035, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  32. Y. Deng, “D numbers: theory and applications,” Journal of Information and Computational Science, vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 2421–2428, 2012. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. X. Deng, Y. Hu, Y. Deng, and S. Mahadevan, “Supplier selection using AHP methodology extended by D numbers,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 156–167, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. X. Deng, Y. Hu, Y. Deng, and S. Mahadevan, “Environmental impact assessment based on D numbers,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 635–643, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. G. Fan, D. Zhong, F. Yan, and P. Yue, “A hybrid fuzzy evaluation method for curtain grouting efficiency assessment based on an AHP method extended by D numbers,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 44, pp. 289–303, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. N. Rikhtegar, N. Mansouri, A. A. Oroumieh, A. Yazdani-Chamzini, E. K. Zavadskas, and S. Kildienė, “Environmental impact assessment based on group decision-making methods in mining projects,” Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 378–392, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. X. Deng, X. Lu, F. T. S. Chan, R. Sadiq, S. Mahadevan, and Y. Deng, “D-CFPR: D numbers extended consistent fuzzy preference relations,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 73, pp. 61–68, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. H.-C. Liu, J.-X. You, X.-J. Fan, and Q.-L. Lin, “Failure mode and effects analysis using D numbers and grey relational projection method,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 4670–4679, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. A. P. Dempster, “Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping,” Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 38, pp. 325–339, 1967. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  40. G. Shafer, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, vol. 1, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1976. View at MathSciNet
  41. B. Shen, Y. Liu, and J.-S. Fu, “An integrated model for robust multisensor data fusion,” Sensors, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 19669–19686, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. Y. Deng, S. Mahadevan, and D. Zhou, “Vulnerability assessment of physical protection systems: a bio-inspired approach,” International Journal of Unconventional Computing, vol. 11, no. 3-4, pp. 227–243, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  43. G. Kabir, S. Tesfamariam, A. Francisque, and R. Sadiq, “Evaluating risk of water mains failure using a Bayesian belief network model,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 240, no. 1, pp. 220–234, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. Y. Li, J. Chen, F. Ye, and D. Liu, “The improvement of DS evidence theory and its application in IR/MMW target recognition,” Journal of Sensors, vol. 2016, Article ID 1903792, 15 pages, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  45. W. Jiang, Y. Yang, Y. Luo, and X. Qin, “Determining basic probability assignment based on the improved similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers,” International Journal of Computers, Communications and Control, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 333–347, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. W. Jiang, J. Zhan, D. Zhou, and X. Li, “A method to determine generalized basic probability assignment in the open world,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, In press.
  47. W.-B. Du, Y. Gao, C. Liu, Z. Zheng, and Z. Wang, “Adequate is better: particle swarm optimization with limited-information,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 268, pp. 832–838, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  48. D. Cheng, R.-X. Hao, and Y.-Q. Feng, “Embedding even cycles on folded hypercubes with conditional faulty edges,” Information Processing Letters, vol. 115, no. 12, pp. 945–949, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  49. Y. Deng, “A threat assessment model under uncertain environment,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 878024, 12 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. O. Basir and X. Yuan, “Engine fault diagnosis based on multi-sensor information fusion using Dempster-Shafer evidence theory,” Information Fusion, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 379–386, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. W. Jiang, B. Wei, C. Xie, and D. Zhou, “An evidential sensor fusion method in fault diagnosis,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1–7, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  52. I. Bloch, “Some aspects of Dempster-Shafer evidence theory for classification of multi-modality medical images taking partial volume effect into account,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 905–919, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. Y. Deng, Y. Liu, and D. Zhou, “An improved genetic algorithm with initial population strategy for symmetric TSP,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2015, Article ID 212794, 6 pages, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. Z.-G. Liu, Q. Pan, and J. Dezert, “A belief classification rule for imprecise data,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 214–228, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. X. Zhang, Y. Deng, F. T. S. Chan, and S. Mahadevan, “A fuzzy extended analytic network process-based approach for global supplier selection,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 760–772, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. J. Ma, W. Liu, P. Miller, and H. Zhou, “An evidential fusion approach for gender profiling,” Information Sciences, vol. 333, pp. 10–20, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  57. L. Sun, R. P. Srivastava, and T. J. Mock, “An information systems security risk assessment model under the Dempster-Shafer theory of belief functions,” Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 109–142, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. W. Jiang, C. Xie, B. Wei, and D. Zhou, “A modified method for risk evaluation in failure modes and effects analysis of aircraft turbine rotor blades,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1–16, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  59. H.-C. Liu, L. Liu, and Q.-L. Lin, “Fuzzy failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy evidential reasoning and belief rule-based methodology,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 23–36, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. Y. Yang and D. Han, “A new distance-based total uncertainty measure in the theory of belief functions,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 94, pp. 114–123, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  61. A. Awasthi and S. S. Chauhan, “Using AHP and Dempster-Shafer theory for evaluating sustainable transport solutions,” Environmental Modelling & Software, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 787–796, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. A. Frikha and H. Moalla, “Analytic hierarchy process for multi-sensor data fusion based on belief function theory,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 241, no. 1, pp. 133–147, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at MathSciNet · View at Scopus
  63. X. Su, S. Mahadevan, P. Xu, and Y. Deng, “Dependence Assessment in Human Reliability Analysis Using Evidence Theory and AHP,” Risk Analysis, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 1296–1316, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. Y. Deng, “Generalized evidence theory,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 530–543, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. W. Jiang, B. Wei, X. Qin, J. Zhan, and Y. Tang, “Sensor data fusion based on a new conflict measure,” Mathematical Problems in Engineering, In press.
  66. X. Su, S. Mahadevan, W. Han, and Y. Deng, “Combining dependent bodies of evidence,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 634–644, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. X. Su, S. Mahadevan, P. Xu, and Y. Deng, “Handling of dependence in Dempster-Shafer theory,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 441–467, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. M. Li, Y. Hu, Q. Zhang, and Y. Deng, “A novel distance function of D numbers and its application in product engineering,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 47, pp. 61–67, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. H.-S. Shih, H.-J. Shyur, and E. S. Lee, “An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 45, no. 7-8, pp. 801–813, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at Scopus