IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/econom/v6y2018i2p87-94n3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fuzzification - Decision Making in Terms of Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Račić Željko V.

    (University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Economics, Republic of Srpska, BiH)

Abstract

The theory of fuzzy sets allows to analyze insufficiently precise, accurate, complete phenomena which can not be modeled by the theory of probability or interval mathematics. We define fuzzy sets as sets where the boundary of the set is unclear and depends on subjective estimation or individual preference. In addition to the standard interpretation scale, described above, a set of numbers to each qualitative attribute must be assigned. In addition to the standard interpretation scale a set of numbers to each qualitative attribute must be assigned. First of all, it is necessary to determine the procedure for determining fuzzy numbers describing the attributes. One of the imperfections of the fuzzy sets is subjectivism when defining the boundaries of fuzzy sets and functions of belonging, which can significantly influence the final decision. The decision maker’s subjectivity is also present in the determination of weighted coefficients. However, in case of giving weight, fixed values are necessary. Some decisions require multidisciplinary knowledge, so the decision-making process includes more group decision-makers, who independently give their grades.

Suggested Citation

  • Račić Željko V., 2018. "Fuzzification - Decision Making in Terms of Uncertainty," Economics, Sciendo, vol. 6(2), pages 87-94, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:econom:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:87-94:n:3
    DOI: 10.2478/eoik-2018-0022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/eoik-2018-0022
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/eoik-2018-0022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yu-Cheng Tang & Thomas W. Lin, 2011. "Application of the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to the lead-free equipment selection decision," International Journal of Business and Systems Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1), pages 35-56.
    2. Zaras, Kazimierz, 2004. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute dominance for deterministic, stochastic and fuzzy decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 196-206, November.
    3. Kamvysi, Konstantina & Gotzamani, Katerina & Andronikidis, Andreas & Georgiou, Andreas C., 2014. "Capturing and prioritizing students’ requirements for course design by embedding Fuzzy-AHP and linear programming in QFD," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(3), pages 1083-1094.
    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. Jiang, Yanping & Liang, Xia & Liang, Haiming & Yang, Ningman, 2018. "Multiple criteria decision making with interval stochastic variables: A method based on interval stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 632-643.
    2. Durbach, Ian N., 2014. "Outranking under uncertainty using scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 98-108.
    3. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    4. Asadabadi, Mehdi Rajabi, 2017. "A customer based supplier selection process that combines quality function deployment, the analytic network process and a Markov chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 1049-1062.
    5. Chowdhury, Md. Maruf Hossan & Quaddus, Mohammed A., 2015. "A multiple objective optimization based QFD approach for efficient resilient strategies to mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities: The case of garment industry of Bangladesh☆,☆☆☆This manuscript was pro," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PA), pages 5-21.
    6. Chanthawong, Anuman & Dhakal, Shobhakar, 2016. "Stakeholders' perceptions on challenges and opportunities for biodiesel and bioethanol policy development in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 189-206.
    7. Yan-Ping Jiang & Hai-Ming Liang & Minghe Sun, 2014. "A method based on the ideal and nadir solutions for stochastic MADM problems," Working Papers 0178mss, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    8. Sevgi Abdalla, 2022. "Application of a Combined Approach of Text Mining and QFD Methodology Based on Single Valued Neutrosophic Numbers for Efficient Curriculum Design," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 10(2), pages 127-138, December.
    9. Anirut Pipatprapa & Hsiang-Hsi Huang & Ching-Hsu Huang, 2016. "A Novel Environmental Performance Evaluation of Thailand’s Food Industry Using Structural Equation Modeling and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Jingxiao Zhang & Klaus Schmidt & Hui Li, 2016. "BIM and Sustainability Education: Incorporating Instructional Needs into Curriculum Planning in CEM Programs Accredited by ACCE," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-32, May.
    11. Jagannath Roy & Dragan Pamučar & Samarjit Kar, 2020. "Evaluation and selection of third party logistics provider under sustainability perspectives: an interval valued fuzzy-rough approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 669-714, October.
    12. Sarah Ben Amor & Kazimierz Zaras & Ernesto A. Aguayo, 2017. "The value of additional information in multicriteria decision making choice problems with information imperfections," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 253(1), pages 61-76, June.
    13. Jean-Charles Marin & Bryan B-Trudel & Kazimierz Zaras & Mamadou Sylla, 2020. "Targeting Poverty and Developing Sustainable Development Objectives for the United Nation’s Countries using a Systematic Approach Combining DRSA and Multiple Linear Regressions," Bulletin of Applied Economics, Risk Market Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 1-24.
    14. Kamvysi, Konstantina & Andronikidis, Andreas & Georgiou, Andreas C. & Gotzamani, Katerina, 2023. "A quality function deployment framework for service strategy planning," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Yun Hwangbo & Young-Seok Yang & Myung-Seuk Kim & YoungJun Kim, 2020. "The Effectiveness of Kano-QFD Approach to Enhance Competitiveness of Technology-Based SMEs through Transfer Intention Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-24, September.
    16. Chowdhury, Md. Maruf Hossan & Quaddus, Mohammed A., 2016. "A multi-phased QFD based optimization approach to sustainable service design," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(P2), pages 165-178.
    17. Maciej Nowak & Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2013. "Interactive procedure for a multiobjective stochastic discrete dynamic problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 315-330, October.
    18. Su-min Yu & Zhi-jiao Du & Xu-dong Lin & Han-yang Luo & Jian-qiang Wang, 2020. "A Stochastic Dominance-Based Approach for Hotel Selection under Probabilistic Linguistic Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-25, September.
    19. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    20. Olson, David L. & Wu, Desheng, 2006. "Simulation of fuzzy multiattribute models for grey relationships," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 111-120, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fuzzification; uncertainty; qualitative attributes; weight coefficients;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C00 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:vrs:econom:v:6:y:2018:i:2:p:87-94:n:3. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.