Entropy-based fuzzy TOPSIS framework for selection of a sustainable building material

References

• Akadiri PO, Olomolaiye PO. 2012. Development of sustainable assessment criteria for building materials selection. Eng Const and Arch Manage. 19(6):666–687.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Ghamdi SG, Bilec MM. 2017. Green building rating systems and whole-building life cycle assessment: comparative study of the existing assessment tools. J Archit Eng. 23(1):04016015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Jebouri MF, Saleh MS, Raman SN, Rahmat RAABO, Shaaban AK. 2017. Toward a national sustainable building assessment system in Oman: assessment categories and their performance indicators. Sustain Cities Soc. 31:122–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anadon LD, Chan G, Harley AG, Matus K, Moon S, Murthy SL, Clark WC. 2016. Making technological innovation work for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 113(35):9682–9690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antoniou F, Aretoulis G. 2018. A multi-criteria decision-making support system for the choice of method of compensation for highway construction contractors in Greece. Int J Constr Manage. 19(6):492–508.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhoum ES, Brown DC. 2012. Developed sustainable scoring system for structural materials evaluation. J Constr Eng Manage. 138(1):110–119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacharjee B. 2010. Sustainability of concrete construction in Indian context. Ind Concr J. 84(7):45–51.
   Google Scholar
• Chan LK, Wu ML. 2005. A systematic approach to quality function deployment with a full illustrative example. Omega. 33(2):119–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterjee AK. 2009. Sustainable construction and green buildings on the foundation of building ecology. Ind Concr J. 83(5):27–30.
   Google Scholar
• Chen CT, Lin CT, Huang SF. 2006. A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management. Int J Product Econom. 102(2):289–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dehghan-Manshadi B, Mahmudi H, Abedian A, Mahmudi R. 2007. A novel method for materials selection in mechanical design: combination of non-linear normalization and a modified digital logic method. Mater Design. 28(1):8–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkar D, Singh M. 2019. Development of risk index for mass rapid transit system project in Western India through application of fuzzy analytical hierarchy process. Int J Constr Manage. 19(1):31–43.
   Google Scholar
• Dos Santos BM, Godoy LP, Campos LM. 2019. Performance evaluation of green suppliers using entropy-TOPSIS-F. J Clean Product. 207:498–509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding GK. 2014. Life cycle assessment (LCA) of sustainable building materials: an overview. In: Pacheco-Torgal F, Cabeza LF, Labrincha J, de Magalhães A, editors. Eco-efficient construction and building materials. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing; p. 38–62.
   Google Scholar
• Gao Y, Liu Z, Hu D, Zhang L, Gu G. 2010. Selection of green product design scheme based on multi-attribute decision-making method. Int J Sustain Eng. 3(4):277–291.
   Google Scholar
• Glass J, Dyer T, Georgopoulos C, Goodier CI, Paine K, Parry T, Baumann H, Gluch P. 2013. Future use of life-cycle assessment in civil engineering. Proc Inst Civil Eng Constr Mater. 166(4):204–212.
   Google Scholar
• Govindan K, Shankar KM, Kannan D. 2016. Sustainable material selection for construction industry: a hybrid multi criteria decision making approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 55:1274–1288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E. 2000. Linguistic decision analysis: steps for solving decision problems under linguistic information. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 115(1):67–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jahan A, Mustapha F, Sapuan SM, Ismail MY, Bahraminasab M. 2012. A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 58(1–4):411–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jahan A, Edwards KL. 2013. VIKOR method for material selection problems with interval numbers and target-based criteria. Mater Design. 47:759–765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu HC, You JX, Zhen L, Fan XJ. 2014. A novel hybrid multiple criteria decision-making model for material selection with target-based criteria. Mater Design. 60:380–390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maniya K, Bhatt MG. 2010. A selection of material using a novel type decision-making method: Preference selection index method. Mater Design. 31(4):1785–1789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayyas A, Omar MA, Hayajneh MT. 2016. Eco-material selection using fuzzy TOPSIS method. Int J Sustain Eng. 9(5):292–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moghtadernejad S, Chouinard LE, Mirza MS. 2018. Multi-criteria decision-making methods for preliminary design of sustainable facades. J Build Eng. 19:181–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikravesh, M. and Zadeh, L.A. eds. 2007. Forging new frontiers: Fuzzy pioneers I, Vol. 217. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Rao RV. 2007. Decision making in the manufacturing environment: using graph theory and fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• Reddy A, Suchith P, Anand Raj P. Rathish Kumar 2018. Developing a Sustainable Building Assessment Tool (SBAT) for developing countries: case of India In Urbanization Challenges in Emerging Economies, Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; p. 137–148. Available from: http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/9780784482032.015.
   Google Scholar
• Reddy AS, Kumar PR, Raj PA. 2019. Preference based multi-criteria framework for developing a Sustainable Material Performance Index (SMPI). Int J Sustain Eng. 12(6):390–403.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeiro RA. 1996. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making: a review and new preference elicitation techniques. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 78(2):155–182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers EM, Valente TW. 2017. A history of information theory in communication research. In: Between communication and information. London (UK): Routledge; p. 35–56.
   Google Scholar
• Sabaghi M, Mascle C, Baptiste P, Rostamzadeh R. 2016. Sustainability assessment using fuzzy-inference technique (SAFT): a methodology toward green products. Expert Syst Appl. 56:69–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarfaraz Khabbaz R, Manshadi BD, Abedian A, Mahmudi R. 2009. A simplified fuzzy logic approach for materials selection in mechanical engineering design. Mater Design. 30(3):687–697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanian A, Savadogo O. 2006. A material selection model based on the concept of multiple attribute decision making. Mater Design. 27(4):329–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana (IL): University of IIIinios.
   Google Scholar
• Torfi F, Farahani RZ, Rezapour S. 2010. Fuzzy AHP to determine the relative weights of evaluation criteria and Fuzzy TOPSIS to rank the alternatives. Applied Soft Comput. 10(2):520–528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valenzuela-Venegas G, Salgado JC, Díaz-Alvarado FA. 2016. Sustainability indicators for the assessment of eco-industrial parks: classification and criteria for selection. J Clean Product. 133:99–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vinodh S, Mulanjur G, Thiagarajan A. 2013. Sustainable concept selection using modified fuzzy TOPSIS: a case study. Int J Sustain Eng. 6(2):109–116.
   Google Scholar
• Xue YX, You JX, Lai XD, Liu HC. 2016. An interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy MABAC approach for material selection with incomplete weight information. Appl Soft Comput. 38:703–713.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zadeh LA. 1965. Information and control. Fuzzy Sets. 8(3):338–353.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann H-J. 2001. Fuzzy set theory and its applications. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar