Pythagorean fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment with pure linguistic information and its application to financial strategies of multi-national companies

References

• Aliakbari Nouri, F., Khalili Esbouei, S., & Antucheviciene, J. (2015). A hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS for technology selection. Informatica, 26(3), 369–388. doi:10.15388/Informatica.2015.53
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems., 20(1), 87–96. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beliakov, G., & James, S. (2014). Averaging aggregation functions for preferences expressed as Pythagorean membership grades and fuzzy orthopairs. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, 298–305.
   Google Scholar
• Bolturk, E. (2018). Pythagorean fuzzy CODAS and its application to supplier selection in a manufacturing firm. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 31(4), 550–564. doi:10.1108/JEIM-01-2018-0020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolturk, E., & Kahraman, C. (2018). Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy CODAS method and its application to wave energy facility location selection problem. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 35(4), 4865–4877. doi:10.3233/JIFS-18979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C. T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9. doi:10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deschrijver, G., & Kerre, E. E. (2002). A generalization of operators on intuitionistic fuzzy sets using triangular norms and conorms. Notes on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, 8(1), 19–27.
   Google Scholar
• Dorokhov, O., Chernov, V., Dorokhova, L., & Streimkis, J. (2018). Multi-Criteria Choice of Alternatives under Fuzzy Information. Transformations in Business & Economics, 17(2), 95–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fatma, B. Y., & Gökhan, Ö. (2018). Interval-valued Atanassov intuitionistic fuzzy CODAS method for multi-criteria group decision making problems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 28, 433–452.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao, H., Lu, M., & Wei, Y. (2019). Dual hesitant bipolar fuzzy hamacher aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute decision making. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 37(4), 5755–5766. doi:10.3233/JIFS-18266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garg, H. (2016). A novel correlation coefficients between Pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications to decision-making processes. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 31(12), 1234–1252. doi:10.1002/int.21827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garg, H. (2018). Linguistic Pythagorean fuzzy sets and its applications in multi-attribute decision-making process. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 33(6), 1234–1263.. doi:10.1002/int.21979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghorabaee, M. K., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Hooshmand, R., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). Fuzzy extension of the CODAS method for multi-criteria market segment evaluation. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(1), 1–19. doi:10.3846/16111699.2016.1278559
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera, F., & Martínez, L. (2001). A model based on linguistic 2-tuples for dealing with multigranular hierarchical linguistic contexts in multiexpert decision-making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), 31(2), 227–234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hosseini, S. T., Lale Arefi, S., Bitarafan, M., Abazarlou, S., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2016). Evaluation types of exterior walls to reconstruct Iran earthquake areas (Ahar Heris Varzeqan) by using AHP and fuzzy methods. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 20(3), 328–340. doi:10.3846/1648715X.2016.1190794
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iqbal, S., Chu, J. X., & Hali, S. M. (2019). Projecting impact of CPEC on Pakistan’s electric power crisis. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 17(4), 310–321. doi:10.1080/10042857.2019.1681879
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahraman, C., Onar, S. C., & Oztaysi, B. (2015). Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 8(4), 637–666. doi:10.1080/18756891.2015.1046325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghorabaee, M. K., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2016). A new combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) method for multi-criteria decision-making. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 50(3), 25–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knezevic, D. (2018). Impact of Blockchain Technology Platform in Changing the Financial Sector and Other Industries. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 14(1), 109–120. doi:10.14254/1800-5845/2018.14-1.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang, D. C., Xu, Z. S., & Darko, A. P. (2017). Projection model for fusing the information of Pythagorean fuzzy multicriteria group decision making based on geometric Bonferroni mean. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32(9), 966–987. doi:10.1002/int.21879
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, N., He, Y., & Xu, Z. (2019). Evaluate Public-Private-Partnership’s advancement using double hierarchy hesitant fuzzy linguistic PROMETHEE with subjective and objective information from stakeholder perspective. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 25(3), 386–420. doi:10.3846/tede.2019.7588
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu, J., Tang, X., Wei, G., Wei, C., & Wei, Y. (2019). Bidirectional project method for dual hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making and their application to performance assessment of new rural construction. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 34(8), 1920–1934. doi:10.1002/int.22126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pamucar, D., Badi, I., Sanja, K., & Obradović, R. (2018). A novel approach for the selection of power-generation technology using a linguistic Neutrosophic CODAS method: a case study in Libya. Energies, 11(9), 2489–2514. doi:10.3390/en11092489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, X. F., Pan, X. Y., Song, M. L., Ai, B. W., & Ming, Y. (2019). Blockchain technology and enterprise operational capabilities: An empirical test. International Journal of Information Management, 101946. DOI:. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panchal, D., Chatterjee, P., Shukla, R. K., Choudhury, T., Tamosaitiene, J., et al. (2017). Integrated fuzzy AHP-CODAS framework for maintenance decision in urea fertilizer industry. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 51(3), 179–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, X. D., & Garg, H. (2018). Algorithms for interval-valued fuzzy soft sets in emergency decision making based on WDBA and CODAS with new information measure. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 119, 439–452.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, X. D., & Li, W. (2019). Algorithms for interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets in emergency decision making based on multi-parametric similarity measures and WDBA. IEEE Access., 7, 7419–7441. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2890097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, X., & Selvachandran, G. (2019). Pythagorean fuzzy set: state of the art and future directions. Artificial Intelligence Review, 52(3), 1873–1927.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peng, X., & Yang, Y. (2016). Pythagorean fuzzy Choquet integral based MABAC method for multiple attribute group decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 31(10), 989–1020. doi:10.1002/int.21814
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pongpimol, S., Badir, Y., Erik, B., & Sukhotu, V. (2020). A multi-criteria assessment of alternative sustainable solid waste management of flexible packaging. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(1), 201–222. doi:10.1108/MEQ-11-2018-0197
   Google Scholar
• Reformat, M. Z., & Yager, R. R. (2014). Suggesting recommendations using Pythagorean fuzzy sets illustrated using Netflix movie data. Information processing and management of uncertainty in knowledge-based Systems, 546–556 Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ren, J. Z. (2018). Sustainability prioritization of energy storage technologies for promoting the development of renewable energy: a novel intuitionistic fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment approach. Renewable Energy., 121, 666–676. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.01.087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ren, P., Xu, Z., & Gou, X. (2016). Pythagorean fuzzy TODIM approach to multi-criteria decision making. Applied Soft Computing, 42, 246–259. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.12.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rondovic, B., Melovic, B., Mitrovic, S., & Ocovaj, S. B. (2018). Determinants of ECRM Adoption and Diffusion-Multistage Analysis in The South-Eastern Europe. Transformations in Business & Economics, 17(3C), 328–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, X., & Wei, G. (2019). Multiple attribute decision-making with dual hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy information. Cognitive Computation, 11(2), 193–211. doi:10.1007/s12559-018-9610-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinodh, S., Sai Balagi, T. S., & Patil, A. (2016). A hybrid MCDM approach for agile concept selection using fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 83(9-12), 1979–1987. doi:10.1007/s00170-015-7718-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., Gao, H., & Wei, G. (2019). The generalized Dice similarity measures for Pythagorean fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 34(6), 1158–1183. doi:10.1002/int.22090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, T., & Chang, T. (2005). Fuzzy VIKOR as a resolution for multi-criteria group decision-making. In: 11th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Shenyang, China, 352–356.
   Google Scholar
• Wei, G. W. (2019). Pythagorean fuzzy Hamacher power aggregation operators in multiple attribute decision making. Fundamenta Informaticae, 166(1), 57–85. doi:10.3233/FI-2019-1794
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, L., Gao, H., & Wei, C. (2019). VIKOR method for financing risk assessment of rural tourism projects under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 37(2), 2001–2008. doi:10.3233/JIFS-179262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, Z. S. (2004). A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making under linguistic preference relations. Information Sciences, 166(1-4), 19–30. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2003.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yager, R. R. (2013). Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In: Proceedings Joint IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting, Edmonton, Canada. Piscataway, NJ, 57–61.
   Google Scholar
• Yager, R. R. (2016). Properties and applications of Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Imprecision and Uncertainty in Information Representation and Processing, 332, 119–136.
   Google Scholar
• Yager, R. R. (2014). Pythagorean membership grades in multi-criteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 22(4), 958–965. doi:10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2278989
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353. doi:10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
   Google Scholar
• Zeng, S. Z. (2017). Pythagorean fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making with probabilistic information and OWA approach. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32(11), 1136–1150. doi:10.1002/int.21886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, X. L., & Xu, Z. S. (2014). Extension of TOPSIS to multi-criteria decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 29(12), 1061–1078. doi:10.1002/int.21676
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, J. M., Su, W. H., Baležentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2018). Multiple criteria group decision-making considering symmetry with regards to the positive and negative ideal solutions via the Pythagorean normal cloud model for application to economic decisions. Symmetry, 10(5), 140–155. doi:10.3390/sym10050140
   Google Scholar