Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41053202›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Advancement in real time football analysis using fuzzy based decision-making of the WASPAS method.

Jun Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Jun MaCollege of Sports Science, Changsha Normal University, Changsha, 410000, China. 18873133778@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to provide workable solutions for improving football players' functional strength training, this study focuses on assessing the effectiveness of intelligent picture-processing approaches employing deep learning algorithms in the context of football. Numerous mathematicians have developed various fuzzy mathematical aggregation operators (AOs). This article explores a potent approach to the circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy set (Crq-ROFS) that is used to mitigate uncertainty and vagueness in human judgments. The discussed fuzzy framework is a broader and extended version of an intuitionistic fuzzy set and q-rung orthopair fuzzy set. Besides the theoretical concepts of circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy information, we modify power aggregation operators to integrate expert's opinions without any external weights of criteria. Besides the concepts of Crq-ROFSs, a family of Dombi power aggregation operators is also initiated, such as the circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy Dombi power-weighted averaging (Crq-ROFDPWA) and circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy Dombi power-weighted geometric (Crq-ROFDPWG) operators. To show the robustness and applicability of derived aggregation operators, some appropriate properties are also discussed. An intelligent decision algorithm for the weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method is established to resolve complex real-life applications under multi-attribute group decision-making (MAGDM) problems. The WASPAS method is also applied to investigate the rank of alternatives under different criteria and human opinions. Furthermore, an application related to advancements in real-time football analysis is discussed with the help of numerical examples and mathematical methodologies. A comparison technique is also adopted to reveal the superiority and effectiveness of pioneering approaches with previously developed mathematical algorithms.

Indexed as

Circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy valuesDecision support system with WASPAS methodDombi power aggregation operators

Identifiers

PMID41053202
PMCPMC12501037

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.