IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jftint/v14y2022i10p271-d920763.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Enhanced ELECTRE II Method for Multi-Attribute Ontology Ranking with Z-Numbers and Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set

Author

Listed:
  • Ameeth Sooklall

    (School of Mathematics, Statistics & Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3201, South Africa)

  • Jean Vincent Fonou-Dombeu

    (School of Mathematics, Statistics & Computer Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3201, South Africa)

Abstract

The high number of ontologies available on the web to date makes it increasingly difficult to select appropriate ontologies for reuse. Many studies have attempted to provide support for ontology selection and ranking; however, the existing studies provide support for ontology ranking from an objective perspective as opposed to a subjective perspective. They do not take into account the qualitative aspects of ontologies. Furthermore, the existing methods have a limited focus on group environments. In this paper, a multi-criteria decision-making approach is presented for ontology ranking with the development of an enhanced model combining the ELECTRE II model with the Z-Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set (ZPLTS). The ZPLTS-ELECTRE II model enables decision-makers to model ontology ranking problems using both numerical and linguistic data. Furthermore, the newly proposed model provides support for ontology ranking in group settings, with an emphasis on modeling the differing levels of credibility of decision-makers using the ZPLTS, which allows decision-makers to not only specify their opinion but also specify their level of credibility. The model was applied to rank a set of mental health ontologies obtained from the BioPortal repository. The results showed that the method was able to rank the ontologies successfully. The results were further compared with the traditional ELECTRE II and the PLTS ELECTRE II methods, displaying superior modeling capabilities. This paper demonstrated the effectiveness of the newly proposed ZPLTS-ELECTRE II model for ontology ranking in a real-world context, but the method is not constrained to the ontology ranking domain; rather, it may be applied to other real-world decision problems as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Ameeth Sooklall & Jean Vincent Fonou-Dombeu, 2022. "An Enhanced ELECTRE II Method for Multi-Attribute Ontology Ranking with Z-Numbers and Probabilistic Linguistic Term Set," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-36, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:271-:d:920763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/14/10/271/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/14/10/271/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tang, Xuli & Li, Xin & Ding, Ying & Song, Min & Bu, Yi, 2020. "The pace of artificial intelligence innovations: Speed, talent, and trial-and-error," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    2. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    3. Ling Pan & Peijia Ren & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "Therapeutic Schedule Evaluation for Brain-Metastasized Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with A Probabilistic Linguistic ELECTRE II Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, August.
    4. Jiahui Chai & Sidong Xian & Sichong Lu, 2021. "Z probabilistic linguistic term sets and its application in multi-attribute group decision making," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 529-566, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Shunxi & Su, Bowen & St-Pierre, David L. & Sui, Pang-Chieh & Zhang, Guofang & Xiao, Jinsheng, 2017. "Decision-making of compressed natural gas station siting for public transportation: Integration of multi-objective optimization, fuzzy evaluating, and radar charting," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 11-17.
    2. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    3. Muhammad Riaz & Wojciech Sałabun & Hafiz Muhammad Athar Farid & Nawazish Ali & Jarosław Wątróbski, 2020. "A Robust q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Information Aggregation Using Einstein Operations with Application to Sustainable Energy Planning Decision Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-39, May.
    4. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    5. Lorena De Medina-Salas & Eduardo Castillo-González & Mario Rafael Giraldi-Díaz & Víctor Guzmán-González, 2017. "Analysis of Economical and Environmental Costs for the Selection of Municipal Solid Waste Treatment and Disposal Scenarios through Multicriteria Analysis (ELECTRE Method)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-8, October.
    6. Naouel Yousfi-Halimi & Mohammed Said Radjef & Hachem Slimani, 2018. "Refinement of pure Pareto Nash equilibria in finite multicriteria games using preference relations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 607-628, August.
    7. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    8. Francisco E. Cabrera & Manuel Amaya & Gustavo Fabián Vaccaro Witt & José Ignacio Peláez, 2019. "Pairwise Voting to Rank Touristic Destinations Based on Preference Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    10. Yazdi, Mohammad & Khan, Faisal & Abbassi, Rouzbeh & Quddus, Noor & Castaneda-Lopez, Homero, 2022. "A review of risk-based decision-making models for microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC) in offshore pipelines," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    11. Maimuna Khatari & A. A. Zaidan & B. B. Zaidan & O. S. Albahri & M. A. Alsalem, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Evaluation and Benchmarking for Active Queue Management Methods: Open Issues, Challenges and Recommended Pathway Solutions," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(04), pages 1187-1242, July.
    12. Fernández, Eduardo & Figueira, José Rui & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2023. "A generalized approach to ordinal classification based on the comparison of actions with either limiting or characteristic profiles," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(3), pages 1309-1322.
    13. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    14. Fernández, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Solares, Efrain, 2022. "A hierarchical interval outranking approach with interacting criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 293-307.
    15. Thies, Christian & Kieckhäfer, Karsten & Spengler, Thomas S. & Sodhi, Manbir S., 2019. "Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 1-21.
    16. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    17. Rocha, António & Costa, Ana Sara & Figueira, José Rui & Ferreira, Diogo Cunha & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2021. "Quality assessment of the Portuguese public hospitals: A multiple criteria approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    18. Xiong Xiaoqin & Cheng Aiguo, 2020. "Evaluation of Heavy Commercial Vehicles Brand Considering Multi-Attribute Indexes in China," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 8(4), pages 291-308, August.
    19. Jafarian, Ahmad & Rabiee, Meysam & Tavana, Madjid, 2020. "A novel multi-objective co-evolutionary approach for supply chain gap analysis with consideration of uncertainties," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    20. Mercè Sala-Rios & Teresa Torres-Solé & Mariona Farré-Perdiguer, 2020. "Can a Multi-Criteria Methodology Fit with Non-Profit Institutions’ Decision-Making? An Application in a Spanish Non-Profit Association," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 17(3), pages 289-315, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jftint:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:271-:d:920763. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.