ArticleScientific reports2024
Correlation coefficients between normal wiggly hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustainable assessment of renewable energy microgrid architectures using a probabilistic hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- An integrated multi criteria decision making method using dual hesitant fuzzy sets with application for unmanned aerial vehicle selection.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) field has long sought tools capable of adeptly capturing the intricacies of human decision-making amidst uncertainty. Hesitant fuzzy sets (HFS) have become a cornerstone in the MCDM field due to their ability to capture the intricacies of human decision-making under uncertainty. Nonetheless, we identified a significant gap in traditional HFS formulations, which often fail to fully harness the nuanced and implicit preferences of decision-makers (DMs). This shortcoming can lead to suboptimal decision outcomes in complex and uncertain environments. We introduce the normal wiggly hesitant fuzzy set (NWHFS), a novel construct that encapsulates both explicit and implicit preferences within a more representative framework. This study pioneers the development of new correlation coefficients for NWHFSs, offering a robust quantitative measure to elucidate the intricate relationships between variables. Our findings demonstrate that NWHFSs significantly enhance the MCDM process, providing a nuanced perspective that traditional HFS models cannot match. The proposed correlation coefficients not only reveal the concealed preferences of DMs but also broaden the decision-making spectrum, offering a more profound understanding of the relationships between alternatives and criteria. We illustrate the superiority of our approach through comparative analysis with existing methods, highlighting its ability to discern subtleties that other models overlook. Moreover, we integrate NWHFSs into clustering analysis, showcasing their potential to classify data sources with shared attributes effectively. This integration is particularly noteworthy for its ability to navigate complex datasets, offering a new dimension in data mining and resource retrieval. In essence, our study redefines the MCDM paradigm by introducing NWHFSs and their correlation coefficients, setting a new standard for decision-making accuracy and insight. The implications of our work extend beyond theory, offering practical solutions to real-world decision-making challenges.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.