A fuzzy-based risk assessment model for evaluations of hazards with a real-case study

References

• Atanassov K. 1986. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:87–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayhan MB. 2017. An integrated hesitant fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS approach for selecting summer sport school. Sakarya Uni J Sci 22:269–84.
   Google Scholar
• Bajestani NS, Kamyad AV, Esfahani EN, et al. 2018. Prediction of retinopathy in diabetic patients using type-2 fuzzy regression model. Eur J Oper Res 264(3):859–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bobillo F, and Straccia U. 2017. Generalizing type-2 fuzzy ontologies and type-2 fuzzy description logics. Int J Approximate Reasoning 87: 40–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolturk E, and Kahraman C. 2018. A novel interval-valued neutrosophic AHP with cosine similarity measure. Soft Comput 22: 4941–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broumi S, and Smarandache F. 2013. Intuitionistic neutrosophic soft set. J Inf Comput Sci 8(2):130–40.
   Google Scholar
• Chang CL. 1968. Fuzzy topological spaces. J Math Anal Appl 24:182–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çoker D. 1997. An introduction to intuitionistic fuzzy topological spaces. Fuzzy Sets Syst 88:81–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdoğan M, and Kaya İ. 2015. An integrated multi-criteria decision-making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets for selection among energy alternatives in Turkey. Iranian J Fuzzy Syst 12(1): 1–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdoğan M, and Kaya İ. 2016. Evaluating alternative-fuel busses for public transportation in Istanbul using interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS. J Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput 26(6): 625–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Go¨rener A, Ayvaz B, Kuşakcı AO, et al. 2017. A hybrid type-2 fuzzy based supplier performance evaluation methodology: The Turkish Airlines technic case. Appl Soft Comput 56:436–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilbahar E, Karaşan A, Cebi S, et al. 2018. A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Safety Sci 103:124–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahraman C, and Kaya İ. 2009. Fuzzy process accuracy index to evaluate risk assessment of drought effects in Turkey. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 15(4): 789–810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahraman C, Kaya İ, and Şenvar Ö. 2013. Healthcare failure mode and effects analysis under fuzziness. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J 19(2): 538–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karaşan A, Ilbahar E, Cebi S, et al. 2018. A new risk assessment approach: safety and critical effect analysis (SCEA) and its extension with pythagorean fuzzy sets. Safety Sci 108:173–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karatas S, and Kuru C. 2016. Neutrosophic topology. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 13: 90–6.
   Google Scholar
• Khooban MH, Vafamand N, Liaghat A, et al. 2016. An optimal general type-2 fuzzy controller for urban traffic network. ISA Trans 66: 335–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya İ, and Kahraman C. 2009. Air pollution control using fuzzy process capability indices in the six-sigma approach. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 15(4): 689–713.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya İ., Kahraman C. 2011. A new tool for risk assessment of air pollution: Fuzzy process capability indices. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 17(3): 613–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya, İ. 2011. Multicriteria location selection of wastewater treatment plant by fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. J Multiple-Valued Logic Soft Comput 17(4): 305–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaya, İ. 2012. Evaluation of outsourcing alternatives under fuzzy environment for waste management. Resour Conserv Recycl 60: 107–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kılıç M, and Kaya İ. 2015. Investment project evaluation by a decision making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput 27: 399–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kılıç M, and Kaya İ. 2016. The prioritisation of provinces for public grants allocation by a decision-making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets. Urban Stud 53(4): 755–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupianez FG. 2008. On neutrosophic topology. Int J Syst Cybern 37(6):797–800.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupianez FG. 2009. Interval neutrosophic set and topology. Int J Syst Cybern 38(3/4):621–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Madylova A, and Oguducu SG. 2009. A taxonomy based semantic similarity of documents using the cosine measure. 24th International Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences 129:34.
   Google Scholar
• Ozek MB, Akulut ZH. 2008. A software tool: type-2 fuzzy logic toolbox. Comput Appl Eng Educ 16(2):137–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özkan B, Kaya İ, Cebeci U, et al. 2015. A hybrid multicriteria decision making methodology based on type-2 fuzzy sets for selection among energy storage alternatives. Int J Comput Intell Syst 8(5): 914–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng X, and Selvachandran G. 2017. Pythagorean fuzzy set: State of the art and future directions. Artif Intell Rev 1–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng X, and Yang Y. 2016. Fundamental proporties of interval valued pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators. Int J Intell Syst 31(5):444–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinto A, Nunes IL, and Ribeiro RA. 2010. Qualitative model for risk assessment in construction industry: A fuzzy logic approach, In: Camarinha-Matos LM, Pereira P, and Ribeiro L (eds), Emerging Trends in Technological Innovation. DoCEIS. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 314, pp 105–11. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez RM, Martinez L, Herrera F. 2012. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 2:109–19.
   Google Scholar
• Salama AA, Smarandache F, Valeri K. 2014. Neutrosophic closed set and neutrosophic continuous functions. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 4:4–8.
   Google Scholar
• Siminski K. 2017. Interval type-2 neuro-fuzzy system with implication-based inference mechanism. Expert Syst Appl 7:140–52.
   Google Scholar
• Smarandache F. 2005. Neutrosophic set-a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set. Int J Pure Appl Math 24(3):287–97.
   Google Scholar
• Tooranloo HS, Azadi MH, Sayyahpoor A. 2017. Analyzing factors affecting implementation success of sustainable human resource management (SHRM) using a hybrid approach of FAHP and Type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL. J Cleaner Product 162:1252–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torra V. 2010. Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25:529–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vella V, Wing LN. 2016. Improving risk-adjusted performance in high frequency trading using interval type-2 fuzzy logic. Expert Syst Appl 55:70–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yager, R.R. 2016. Properties and Applications of Pythagorean Fuzzy Sets. Imprecision and Uncertainty in Information Representation and Processing. Springer, pp 119–136.
   Google Scholar
• Zadeh LA.1965. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, and Wang X. 2017. Note on the absorption laws in the algebra of truth values of type-2 fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 332:111–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar