Interval-Valued Spherical Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Method to Evaluate Public Transportation Development

Consensus creation is a complex challenge in decision making for conflicting or quasiconflicting evaluator groups. The problem is even more difficult to solve, if one or more respondents are non-expert and provide uncertain or hesitant responses in a survey. This paper presents a methodological approach, the Interval-valued Spherical Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, with the objective to handle both types of problems simultaneously; considering hesitant scoring and synthesizing different stakeholder group opinions by a mathematical procedure. Interval-valued spherical fuzzy sets are superior to the other extensions with a more flexible characterization of membership function. Interval-valued spherical fuzzy sets are employed for incorporating decision makers’ judgements about the membership functions of a fuzzy set into the model with an interval instead of a single point. In the paper, Interval-valued spherical fuzzy AHP method has been applied to public transportation problem. Public transport development is an appropriate case study to introduce the new model and analyse the results due to the involvement of three classically conflicting stakeholder groups: passengers, non-passenger citizens and the representatives of the local municipality. Data from a real-world survey conducted recently in the Turkish big city, Mersin, help in understanding the new concept. As comparison, all likenesses and differences of the outputs have been pointed out in the reflection with the picture fuzzy AHP computation of the same data. The results are demonstrated and analysed in detail and the step-by-step description of the procedure might foment other applications of the model.

[1]  Yongquan Zhou,et al.  Multi-criteria group decision making based on neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process , 2017, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[2]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .

[3]  L. A. ZADEH,et al.  The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning - I , 1975, Inf. Sci..

[4]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Integrating multiplicative preference relations in a multipurpose decision-making model based on fuzzy preference relations , 2001, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[5]  Stanislav Karapetrovic,et al.  A quality control approach to consistency paradoxes in AHP , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[6]  Chia-Nan Wang,et al.  A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Approach Using Hybrid SCOR Metrics, AHP, and TOPSIS for Supplier Evaluation and Selection in the Gas and Oil Industry , 2018, Processes.

[7]  Solomon Tesfamariam,et al.  Environmental decision-making under uncertainty using intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (IF-AHP) , 2009 .

[8]  Kexin Li,et al.  Selecting sustainable energy conversion technologies for agricultural residues: A fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based prioritization from life cycle perspective , 2019, Resources, Conservation and Recycling.

[9]  Hossein Bonakdari,et al.  Extension of Fuzzy Delphi AHP Based on Interval-Valued Fuzzy Sets and its Application in Water Resource Rating Problems , 2016, Water Resources Management.

[10]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process with interval type-2 fuzzy sets , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[11]  Francesca Abastante,et al.  A new parsimonious AHP methodology: Assigning priorities to many objects by comparing pairwise few reference objects , 2019, Expert Syst. Appl..

[12]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach Based on Mixtures for Group Pattern Identification , 2007 .

[13]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-III , 1975, Inf. Sci..

[14]  W. Pedrycz,et al.  A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory , 1983 .

[15]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  Evaluation of Social Sustainable Development Factors Using Buckley’s Fuzzy AHP Based on Z-Numbers , 2019, Intelligent and Fuzzy Techniques in Big Data Analytics and Decision Making.

[16]  Szabolcs Duleba,et al.  A dynamic analysis on public bus transport's supply quality by using AHP , 2012 .

[17]  Evangelos Triantaphyllou,et al.  Analysis of the Final Ranking Decisions Made by Experts After a Consensus has Been Reached in Group Decision Making , 2020 .

[18]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  A novel interval-valued neutrosophic AHP with cosine similarity measure , 2018, Soft Computing.

[19]  Ralf H. Kaspar,et al.  Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis , 2016 .

[20]  Ying-Chyi Chou,et al.  Assessing the Human Resource in Science and Technology for Asian Countries: Application of Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS , 2019, Symmetry.

[21]  Arpan Kumar Kar,et al.  A hybrid group decision support system for supplier selection using analytic hierarchy process, fuzzy set theory and neural network , 2015, J. Comput. Sci..

[22]  AbdullahLazim,et al.  A new type-2 fuzzy set of linguistic variables for the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process , 2014 .

[23]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Analysing Stakeholder Consensus for a Sustainable Transport Development Decision by the Fuzzy AHP and Interval AHP , 2019, Sustainability.

[24]  Saleem Abdullah,et al.  Spherical fuzzy sets and its representation of spherical fuzzy t-norms and t-conorms , 2019, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[25]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  Hesitant fuzzy analytic hierarchy process , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE).

[26]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  Reviewing the Use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Evaluation of Transport Projects: Time for a Multi-Actor Approach , 2015 .

[27]  Florentin Smarandache,et al.  A unifying field in logics : neutrosophic logic : neutrosophy, neutrosophic set, neutrosophic probability , 2020 .

[28]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  Consistency of the fused intuitionistic fuzzy preference relation in group intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[29]  Daniela Fuchs-Hanusch,et al.  A framework for water loss management in developing countries under fuzzy environment: Integration of Fuzzy AHP with Fuzzy TOPSIS , 2016, Expert Syst. Appl..

[30]  Keun-Tae Cho,et al.  A loss function approach to group preference aggregation in the AHP , 2008, Comput. Oper. Res..

[31]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Fuzzy Sets , 1996, Inf. Control..

[32]  Dago Antov,et al.  Sustainable Urban Transport Planning , 2013 .

[33]  T. L. Saaty A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[34]  Alessio Ishizaka,et al.  Analytic Hierarchy Process and Its Extensions , 2019, Multiple Criteria Decision Making.

[35]  Ji-Hyun Lee,et al.  Supporting user participation design using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach , 2011, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..

[36]  Lazim Abdullah,et al.  Pythagorean fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to multi-criteria decision making , 2017 .

[37]  Fawaz E. Alsaadi,et al.  Aggregation of the nearest consistency matrices with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM , 2020, Annals of Operations Research.

[38]  J. Buckley,et al.  Fuzzy hierarchical analysis , 1999, FUZZ-IEEE'99. 1999 IEEE International Fuzzy Systems. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH36315).

[39]  Robert LIN,et al.  NOTE ON FUZZY SETS , 2014 .

[40]  Melike Erdogan,et al.  Evaluating Alternative-Fuel Busses for Public Transportation in Istanbul Using Interval Type-2 Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS , 2016, J. Multiple Valued Log. Soft Comput..

[41]  X. Zeshui,et al.  A consistency improving method in the analytic hierarchy process , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[42]  Anjali Awasthi,et al.  Using AHP and Dempster-Shafer theory for evaluating sustainable transport solutions , 2011, Environ. Model. Softw..

[43]  İhsan Kaya,et al.  Investment project evaluation by a decision making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets , 2015, Appl. Soft Comput..

[44]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Integration of interval rough AHP and interval rough MABAC methods for evaluating university web pages , 2018, Appl. Soft Comput..

[45]  Bui Cong Cuong,et al.  Picture fuzzy sets , 2015 .

[46]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach , 2010, Oper. Res..

[47]  E. F. Lane,et al.  A CONSISTENCY TEST FOR AHP DECISION MAKERS , 1989 .

[48]  Krassimir T. Atanassov,et al.  Intuitionistic fuzzy sets , 1986 .

[49]  Burak Efe,et al.  An integrated fuzzy multi criteria group decision making approach for ERP system selection , 2016, Appl. Soft Comput..

[50]  G. S. Beriha,et al.  Use of compromise ranking method for supervisor selection: A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach , 2009 .

[51]  Hamido Fujita,et al.  Consensus analysis for AHP multiplicative preference relations based on consistency control: A heuristic approach , 2020, Knowl. Based Syst..

[52]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .

[53]  Lazim Abdullah,et al.  A new type-2 fuzzy set of linguistic variables for the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[54]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  MULTIATTRIBUTE WAREHOUSE LOCATION SELECTION IN HUMANITARIAN LOGISTICS USING HESITANT FUZZY AHP , 2016 .

[55]  László Csató,et al.  An application of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices for ranking top tennis players , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[56]  L. N. Pradeep Kumar Rallabandi,et al.  Improved Consistency Ratio for Pairwise Comparison Matrix in Analytic Hierarchy Processes , 2016, Asia Pac. J. Oper. Res..

[57]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  Spherical fuzzy sets and spherical fuzzy TOPSIS method , 2019, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[58]  Cengiz Kahraman,et al.  A novel spherical fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and its renewable energy application , 2020, Soft Comput..

[59]  Fatma Kutlu Gündoğdu,et al.  Evaluating public transport service quality using picture fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and linear assignment model , 2021, Appl. Soft Comput..

[60]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Pythagorean fuzzy subsets , 2013, 2013 Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS).

[61]  Lazim Abdullah,et al.  A new preference scale mcdm method based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and the analytic hierarchy process , 2016, Soft Comput..

[62]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[63]  Witold Pedrycz,et al.  Assessment for hierarchical medical policy proposals using hesitant fuzzy linguistic analytic network process , 2018, Knowl. Based Syst..

[64]  Sarbast Moslem,et al.  Examining Pareto optimality in analytic hierarchy process on real Data: An application in public transport service development , 2019, Expert Syst. Appl..

[65]  Thomas Blaschke,et al.  Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model , 2018, Sustainability.

[66]  Fatih Tüysüz,et al.  A hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets-based AHP approach for analyzing the performance evaluation factors: an application to cargo sector , 2017 .

[67]  Vicenç Torra,et al.  Hesitant fuzzy sets , 2010, Int. J. Intell. Syst..