Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38585422›Full record

ArticleGranular computing2024

An extension of the best-worst method based on the spherical fuzzy sets for multi-criteria decision-making.

Gholamreza Haseli, Reza Sheikh, Saeid Jafarzadeh Ghoushchi, Mostafa Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, Sarbast Moslem, Muhammet Deveci, Seifedine Kadry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Granular computing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gholamreza HaseliTecnologico de Monterrey, School of Engineering and Sciences, Monterrey, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-1180-1933
Reza SheikhFaculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-9238-5010
Saeid Jafarzadeh GhoushchiFaculty of Industrial Engineering, Urmia University of Technology, Urmia, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-3665-9010
Mostafa Hajiaghaei-KeshteliTecnologico de Monterrey, School of Engineering and Sciences, Monterrey, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-9988-2626
Sarbast MoslemSchool of Architecture Planning and Environmental Policy, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, D04 V1W8 Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-4587-7482
Muhammet DeveciDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Turkish Naval Academy, National Defence University, 34942 Tuzla, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0002-3712-976X
Seifedine KadryDepartment of Applied Data Science, Noroff University College, Kristiansand, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-1939-4842

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ambiguous information in multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) and the vagueness of decision-makers for qualitative judgments necessitate accurate tools to overcome uncertainties and generate reliable solutions. As one of the latest and most powerful MCDM methods for obtaining criteria weight, the best-worst method (BWM) has been developed. Compared to other MCDM methods, such as the analytic hierarchy process, the BWM requires fewer pairwise comparisons and produces more consistent results. Consequently, the main objective of this study is to develop an extension of BWM using spherical fuzzy sets (SFS) to address MCDM problems under uncertain conditions. Hesitancy, non-membership, and membership degrees are three-dimensional functions included in the SFS. The presence of three defined degrees allows decision-makers to express their judgments more accurately. An optimization model based on nonlinear constraints is used to determine optimal spherical fuzzy weight coefficients (SF-BWM). Additionally, a consistency ratio is proposed for the SF-BWM to assess the reliability of the proposed method in comparison to other versions of BWM. SF-BWM is examined using two numerical decision-making problems. The results show that the proposed method based on the SF-BWM provided the criteria weights with the same priority as the BWM and fuzzy BWM. However, there are differences in the criteria weight values based on the SF-BWM that indicate the accuracy and reliability of the obtained results. The main advantage of using SF-BWM is providing a better consistency ratio. Based on the comparative analysis, the consistency ratio obtained for SF-BWM is threefold better than the BWM and fuzzy BWM methods, which leads to more accurate results than BWM and fuzzy BWM.

Indexed as

Best–worst methodConsistency ratioFuzzy setMulti-criteria decision-makingSpherical fuzzy sets

Identifiers

PMID38585422
PMCPMC10996092

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.