Uncovering the academic evolution of VIKOR method: a comprehensive main path analysis

References

• Ak, M. F., & Gul, M. (2019). AHP–TOPSIS integration extended with Pythagorean fuzzy sets for information security risk analysis. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 5(2), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-018-0087-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akram, M., Shabir, M., Adeel, A., & Al-Kenani, A. N. (2021). A multiattribute decision-making framework: VIKOR method with complex spherical fuzzy-soft sets. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2021, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1490807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydoğdu, A., & Gül, S. (2020). A novel entropy proposition for spherical fuzzy sets and its application in multiple attribute decision‐making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 35(9), 1354–1374. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22256
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (1998). Pajek-program for large network analysis. Connections, 21(2), 47–57.
   Google Scholar
• Bellman, R. E., & Zadeh, L. A. (1970). Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Management Science, 17(4), B-141–B-164. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.17.4.B141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boral, S., Howard, I., Chaturvedi, S. K., McKee, K., & Naikan, V. N. A. (2020). A novel hybrid multi-criteria group decision making approach for failure mode and effect analysis: An essential requirement for sustainable manufacturing. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 21, 14–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2019.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bortoluzzi, M., de Souza, C. C., & Furlan, M. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of renewable energy types using key performance indicators and multicriteria decision models. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 143, 110958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110958
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The P ROMET HEE method. European journal of operational research, 24(2), 228–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Büyüközkan, G., & Tüfekçi, G. (2021). A decision-making framework for evaluating appropriate business blockchain platforms using multiple preference formats and VIKOR. Information Sciences, 571, 337–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2021.04.044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çalı, S., & Balaman, Ş. Y. (2019). A novel outranking based multi criteria group decision making methodology integrating ELECTRE and VIKOR under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 119, 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.10.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. (1962). Chance constraints and normal deviates. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(297), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1962.10482155
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, T. Y. (2018). Remoteness index-based Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR methods with a generalized distance measure for multiple criteria decision analysis. Information Fusion, 41, 129–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2017.09.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, S., Jianfu, S., Alrasheedi, M., Saeidi, P., Mishra, A. R., & Rani, P. (2021). A new extended VIKOR approach using q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets for sustainable enterprise risk management assessment in manufacturing small and medium-sized enterprises. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 23(5), 1347–1369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-020-01024-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chowdhury, P., & Paul, S. K. (2020). Applications of MCDM methods in research on corporate sustainability: A systematic literature review. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(2), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-12-2019-0284
   Google Scholar
• Dai, Z., Xu, S., Wu, X., Hu, R., Li, H., He, H., Hu, J., & Liao, X. (2022). Knowledge mapping of multicriteria decision analysis in healthcare: A bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 895552. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.895552
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding, X. F., & Liu, H. C. (2019). An extended prospect theory–VIKOR approach for emergency decision making with 2-dimension uncertain linguistic information. Soft Computing, 23(22), 12139–12150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04092-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding, Z., Yüksel, S., & Dinçer, H. (2021). An Integrated Pythagorean fuzzy soft computing approach to environmental management systems for sustainable energy pricing. Energy Reports, 7, 5575–5588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.08.181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Du, Y., & Liu, D. (2021). A novel approach for probabilistic linguistic multiple attribute decision making based on dual Muirhead mean operators and VIKOR. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 23(1), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-020-00897-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebrahimnejad, S., Mousavi, S. M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., Hashemi, H., & Vahdani, B. (2012). A novel two-phase group decision making approach for construction project selection in a fuzzy environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 36(9), 4197–4217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2011.11.050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Efe, B. (2019). Analysis of operational safety risks in shipbuilding using failure mode and effect analysis approach. Ocean Engineering, 187, 106214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elzarka, H. M., Yan, H., & Chakraborty, D. (2017). A vague set fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making model for selecting onsite renewable energy technologies for institutional owners of constructed facilities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 35, 430–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.08.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emeç, Ş., & Akkaya, G. (2018). Stochastic AHP and fuzzy VIKOR approach for warehouse location selection problem. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31(6), 950–962. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2016-0195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, S., Zhou, P., Dinçer, H., & Yüksel, S. (2021). Assessment of safety management system on energy investment risk using house of quality based on hybrid stochastic interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy decision-making approach. Safety Science, 141, 105333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fattahi, R., & Khalilzadeh, M. (2018). Risk evaluation using a novel hybrid method based on FMEA, extended MULTIMOORA, and AHP methods under fuzzy environment. Safety Science, 102, 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.10.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Girubha, R. J., & Vinodh, S. (2012). Application of fuzzy VIKOR and environmental impact analysis for material selection of an automotive component. Materials & Design, 37(2012), 478–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.01.022
   Google Scholar
• Gou, X., Xu, X., Deng, F., Zhou, W., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2023). Medical health resources allocation evaluation in public health emergencies by an improved ORESTE method with linguistic preference orderings. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 23(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10700-023-09409-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gou, X., Xu, Z., & Liao, H. (2017). Hesitant fuzzy linguistic entropy and cross-entropy measures and alternative queuing method for multiple criteria decision making. Information Sciences, 388–389, 225–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.01.033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gou, X., Xu, Z., Liao, H., & Herrera, F. (2021). Probabilistic double hierarchy linguistic term set and its use in designing an improved VIKOR method: The application in smart healthcare. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 72(12), 2611–2630. https://doi.org/10.1080/01605682.2020.1806741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gul, M. (2018). A review of occupational health and safety risk assessment approaches based on multi-criteria decision-making methods and their fuzzy versions. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 24(7), 1723–1760. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1424531
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gul, M. (2018). Application of Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and VIKOR methods in occupational health and safety risk assessment: The case of a gun and rifle barrel external surface oxidation and colouring unit. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics: JOSE, 26(4), 705–718. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1492251
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gul, M., Ak, M. F., & Guneri, A. F. (2019). Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR-based approach for safety risk assessment in mine industry. Journal of Safety Research, 69, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2019.03.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gul, M., Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2017). A hybrid risk-based approach for maritime applications: The case of ballast tank maintenance. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 23(6), 1389–1403. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2017.1317204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gul, M., Celik, E., Aydin, N., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2016). A state of the art literature review of VIKOR and its fuzzy extensions on applications. Applied Soft Computing, 46, 60–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2016.04.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He, T., Wei, G., Lin, R., Lu, J., Wei, C., & Wu, J. (2020). Pythagorean interval 2-tuple linguistic VIKOR method for evaluating human factors in construction project management. Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 17(6), 93–105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, S. W., Liou, J. J., Chuang, H. H., & Tzeng, G. H. (2021). Using a modified VIKOR technique for evaluating and improving the national healthcare system quality. Mathematics, 9(12), 1349. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9121349
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hummon, N. P., & Dereian, P. (1989). Connectivity in a citation network: The development of DNA theory. Social Networks, 11(1), 39–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(89)90017-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung, S. C., Liu, J. S., Lu, L. Y., & Tseng, Y. C. (2014). Technological change in lithium iron phosphate battery: The key-route main path analysis. Scientometrics, 100(1), 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1276-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications a State-of-the-Art Survey, 186, 58–191.
   Google Scholar
• Jin, C., Ran, Y., & Zhang, G. (2021). An improving failure mode and effect analysis method for pallet exchange rack risk analysis. Soft Computing, 25(24), 15221–15241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-06359-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jun, Q., Dinçer, H., & Yüksel, S. (2021). Stochastic hybrid decision‐making based on interval type 2 fuzzy sets for measuring the innovation capacities of financial institutions. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(1), 573–593. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.1805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaushik, V., Khare, A., Boardman, R., & Cano, M. B. (2020). Why do online retailers succeed? The identification and prioritization of success factors for Indian fashion retailers. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 39, 100906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100906
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, Y., & Chung, E. S. (2013). Fuzzy VIKOR approach for assessing the vulnerability of the water supply to climate change and variability in South Korea. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(22), 9419–9430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.04.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koc, K., & Pelin Gurgun, A. (2021). Assessment of readability risks in contracts causing conflicts in construction projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(6), 04021041. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar, A., Sah, B., Singh, A. R., Deng, Y., He, X., Kumar, P., & Bansal, R. C. (2017). A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 69, 596–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuo, M. S., & Liang, G. S. (2011). Combining VIKOR with GRA techniques to evaluate service quality of airports under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 1304–1312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kutlu Gündoğdu, F., & Kahraman, C. (2019). A novel VIKOR method using spherical fuzzy sets and its application to warehouse site selection. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 37(1), 1197–1211. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-182651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahdelma, R., Salminen, P., & Hokkanen, J. (2000). Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environmental Management, 26(6), 595–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002670010118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H. C., & Chang, C. T. (2018). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for ranking renewable energy sources in Taiwan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 92, 883–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, D. (1995). Membership clouds and membership cloud generators. Computer Research and Development, 32(6), 15–20.
   Google Scholar
• Li, J., Fang, H., & Song, W. (2019). Modified failure mode and effects analysis under uncertainty: A rough cloud theory-based approach. Applied Soft Computing, 78, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.02.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, M., Chen, Z., Xu, Z., Gou, X., & Herrera, F. (2021). Score function based on concentration degree for probabilistic linguistic term sets: An application to TOPSIS and VIKOR. Information Sciences, 551, 270–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2020.10.061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H. C., Chen, X. Q., Duan, C. Y., & Wang, Y. M. (2019). Failure mode and effect analysis using multi-criteria decision making methods: A systematic literature review. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 135, 881–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.06.055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H. C., Liu, L., Liu, N., & Mao, L. X. (2012). Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis with extended VIKOR method under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 12926–12934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J. S., & Lu, L. Y. (2012). An integrated approach for main path analysis: Development of the Hirsch index as an example. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 528–542. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J. S., Lu, L. Y., Lu, W. M., & Lin, B. J. (2013). Data envelopment analysis 1978–2010: A citation-based literature survey. Omega, 41(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2010.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J., Lv, J., Dinçer, H., Yüksel, S., & Karakuş, H. (2021). Selection of renewable energy alternatives for green blockchain investments: A hybrid IT2-based fuzzy modelling. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 28(5), 3687–3701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-020-09521-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H. C., You, J. X., Fan, X. J., & Chen, Y. Z. (2014). Site selection in waste management by the VIKOR method using linguistic assessment. Applied Soft Computing, 21, 453–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, H. C., You, J. X., You, X. Y., & Shan, M. M. (2015). A novel approach for failure mode and effects analysis using combination weighting and fuzzy VIKOR method. Applied soft computing, 28, 579–588.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, X., Zhu, S., Yüksel, S., Dinçer, H., & Ubay, G. G. (2020). Kano-based mapping of innovation strategies for renewable energy alternatives using hybrid interval type-2 fuzzy decision-making approach. Energy, 211, 118679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lo, H. W., & Liou, J. J. (2018). A novel multiple-criteria decision-making-based FMEA model for risk assessment. Applied Soft Computing, 73, 684–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.09.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma, X., Akram, M., Zahid, K., & Alcantud, J. C. R. (2021). Group decision-making framework using complex Pythagorean fuzzy information. Neural Computing and Applications, 33(6), 2085–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05100-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., Hooker, R. E., Ozkul, S., Yifan, S., Nilashi, M., Sabzi, H. Z., & Fei, G. C. (2019). Application of decision making and fuzzy sets theory to evaluate the healthcare and medical problems: A review of three decades of research with recent developments. Expert Systems with Applications, 137, 202–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Govindan, K., Amat Senin, A., & Jusoh, A. (2016). VIKOR technique: A systematic review of the state of the art literature on methodologies and applications. Sustainability, 8(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8010037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meng, Y., Wu, H., Zhao, W., Chen, W., Dinçer, H., & Yüksel, S. (2021). A hybrid heterogeneous Pythagorean fuzzy group decision modelling for crowdfunding development process pathways of fintech-based clean energy investment projects. Financial Innovation, 7(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-021-00250-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghtadernejad, S., Chouinard, L. E., & Mirza, M. S. (2018). Multi-criteria decision-making methods for preliminary design of sustainable facades. Journal of Building Engineering, 19, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2018.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morkūnaitė, Ž., Kalibatas, D., & Kalibatienė, D. (2019). A bibliometric data analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods in heritage buildings. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 25(2), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2019.8315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mousavi, S. M., Jolai, F., & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2013). A fuzzy stochastic multi-attribute group decision-making approach for selection problems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 22(2), 207–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-011-9259-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 2(1), 5–21.
   Google Scholar
• Opricovic, S. (2007). A fuzzy compromise solution for multicriteria problems. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 15(03), 363–380. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488507004728
   Google Scholar
• Opricovic, S. (2011). Fuzzy VIKOR with an application to water resources planning. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 12983–12990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. H. (2002). Multicriteria planning of post‐earthquake sustainable reconstruction. Computer‐Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 17(3), 211–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdemir, Y., Gul, M., & Celik, E. (2017). Assessment of occupational hazards and associated risks in fuzzy environment: a case study of a university chemical laboratory. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 23(4), 895–924.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oztaysi, B., Onar, S. C., Gündogdu, F. K., & Kahraman, C. (2020). Location based advertisement selection using spherical fuzzy AHP-VIKOR. Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic & Soft Computing, 35, 5–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pareto, V. (1897). The new theories of economics. Journal of Political Economy, 5(4), 485–502. https://doi.org/10.1086/250454
   Google Scholar
• Phochanikorn, P., & Tan, C. (2019). A new extension to a multi-criteria decision-making model for sustainable supplier selection under an intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Sustainability, 11(19), 5413. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rezaei, J. (2015). Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega, 53, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rojas-Zerpa, J. C., & Yusta, J. M. (2015). Application of multicriteria decision methods for electric supply planning in rural and remote areas. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 52, 557–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roy, B. (1968). Ranking and choice in pace of multiple points of view (ElECT RE method). Revue Francaise D Informatique De Recherche Operationnelle, 2(8), 57.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41(11), 1073–1076.
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L. (2005). Theory and applications of the analytic network process: Decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. RWS publications.
   Google Scholar
• Shahri, M. M., Jahromi, A. E., & Houshmand, M. (2021). Failure mode and effect analysis using an integrated approach of clustering and MCDM under pythagorean fuzzy environment. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 72, 104591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2021.104591
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, K. Y., Zavadskas, E. K., & Tzeng, G. H. (2018). Updated discussions on ‘Hybrid multiple criteria decisionmaking methods: A review of applications for sustainability issues’. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 31(1), 1437–1452. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2018.1483836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1960). The new science of management decision. [Database].
   Google Scholar
• Soner, O., Celik, E., & Akyuz, E. (2017). Application of AHP and VIKOR methods under interval type 2 fuzzy environment in maritime transportation. Ocean Engineering, 129, 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.11.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suganthi, L. (2018). Multi expert and multi criteria evaluation of sectoral investments for sustainable development: An integrated fuzzy AHP, VIKOR/DEA methodology. Sustainable Cities and Society, 43, 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.08.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun, P., Liu, Y., Qiu, X., & Wang, L. (2015). Hybrid multiple attribute group decision-making for power system restoration. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(19), 6795–6805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tadić, S., Zečević, S., & Krstić, M. (2014). A novel hybrid MCDM model based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy VIKOR for city logistics concept selection. Expert systems with applications, 41(18), 8112–8128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Di Caprio, D., & Santos-Arteaga, F. J. (2018). An extended stochastic VIKOR model with decision maker’s attitude towards risk. Information Sciences, 432, 301–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.12.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian, G., Liu, X., Zhang, M., Yang, Y., Zhang, H., Lin, Y., Ma, F., Wang, X., Qu, T., & Li, Z. (2019). Selection of take-back pattern of vehicle reverse logistics in China via grey-DEMATEL and fuzzy-VIKOR combined method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 220, 1088–1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian, G., Zhang, H., Feng, Y., Wang, D., Peng, Y., & Jia, H. (2018). Green decoration materials selection under interior environment characteristics: A grey-correlation based hybrid MCDM method. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 682–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ture, H., Dogan, S., & Kocak, D. (2019). Assessing Euro 2020 strategy using multi-criteria decision making methods: VIKOR and TOPSIS. Social Indicators Research, 142(2), 645–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1938-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tzeng, G. H., Lin, C. W., & Opricovic, S. (2005). Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy, 33(11), 1373–1383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, X., & Cai, J. (2017). A group decision-making model based on distance-based VIKOR with incomplete heterogeneous information and its application to emergency supplier selection. Kybernetes, 46(3), 501–529. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-06-2016-0132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C. Y., & Chen, S. M. (2017). Multiple attribute decision making based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets, linear programming methodology, and the extended TOPSIS method. Information Sciences, 411, 176–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.05.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, H., Pan, X., & He, S. (2019). A new interval type-2 fuzzy VIKOR method for multi-attribute decision making. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 21(1), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-018-0527-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., Wei, G., Wei, C., & Wei, Y. (2020). MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making under q-rung orthopair fuzzy environment. Defence Technology, 16(1), 208–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2019.06.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., Yuan, J., Zhang, J., & Tang, M. (2021). A novel group decision-making method based on generalized distance measures of PLTSs on e-commerce shopping. Complexity, 2021, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5553343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Zhou, H., Dincer, H., Yuksel, S., Ubay, G. G., & Uluer, G. S. (2020). Analysis of electricity pricing in emerging economies with hybrid multi-criteria decision-making technique based on interval-valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy sets. IEEE Access, 8, 190882–190896. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3031761
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Q., Liu, X., Qin, J., Wang, W., & Zhou, L. (2021). A linguistic distribution behavioral multi-criteria group decision making model integrating extended generalized TODIM and quantum decision theory. Applied Soft Computing, 98, 106757.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, H. Y., Tzeng, G. H., & Chen, Y. H. (2009). A fuzzy MCDM approach for evaluating banking performance based on Balanced Scorecard. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 10135–10147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., Zhang, T., Xu, C., Zhang, X., Ke, Y., Chu, H., & Xu, R. (2019). Location selection of seawater pumped hydro storage station in China based on multi-attribute decision making. Renewable Energy, 139, 410–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao, L., Wei, G., Guo, Y., & Chen, X. (2021). Taxonomy method for multiple attribute group decision making based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy with entropy. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 41(6), 7031–7045. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-210918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiong, S. H., Chen, Z. S., Chiclana, F., Chin, K. S., & Skibniewski, M. J. (2022). Proportional hesitant 2‐tuple linguistic distance measurements and extended VIKOR method: Case study of evaluation and selection of green airport plans. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 37(7), 4113–4162. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, S., Hao, L., An, X., Pang, H., & Li, T. (2020). Review on emerging research topics with key-route main path analysis. Scientometrics, 122(1), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03288-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, K., Duan, T., Feng, J., & Mishra, A. R. (2022). Internet of things challenges of sustainable supply chain management in the manufacturing sector using an integrated q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy-CRITIC-VIKOR method. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(4/5), 1011–1039. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-06-2021-0261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• You, X. Y., You, J. X., Liu, H. C., & Zhen, L. (2015). Group multi-criteria supplier selection using an extended VIKOR method with interval 2-tuple linguistic information. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(4), 1906–1916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, D.,Sheng, L., &Xu, Z. (2022). Analysis of evolutionary process in intuitionistic fuzzy set theory: A dynamic perspective. Information Sciences, 601, 175–188. 10.1016/j.ins.2022.04.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, D.,Liu, Y., &Xu, Z. (2023). Analysis of knowledge evolution in PROMETHEE: A longitudinal and dynamic perspective. Information Sciences, 642, 119151 10.1016/j.ins.2023.119151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, D., &Yan, Z. (2024). Knowledge diffusion trajectories of PageRank: A main path analysis. Journal of Information Science, 50(1), 273–287. 10.1177/01655515231167388
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, D., & Pan, T. (2021). Tracing knowledge diffusion of TOPSIS: A historical perspective from citation network. Expert Systems with Applications, 168, 114238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarei, E., Ramavandi, B., Darabi, A. H., & Omidvar, M. (2021). A framework for resilience assessment in process systems using a fuzzy hybrid MCDM model. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 69, 104375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104375
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, C., Chen, C., Streimikiene, D., & Balezentis, T. (2019). Intuitionistic fuzzy MULTIMOORA approach for multi-criteria assessment of the energy storage technologies. Applied Soft Computing, 79, 410–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.04.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, M., Wei, G., Chen, X., & Wei, Y. (2021). Intuitionistic fuzzy MABAC method based on cumulative prospect theory for multiple attribute group decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 36(11), 6337–6359. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zyoud, S. H., & Fuchs-Hanusch, D. (2017). A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Systems with Applications, 78, 158–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar