Abstract
The population growth and urbanization has caused an exponential increase in waste material. The proper disposal of waste is a challenging problem nowadays. The proper disposal site selection with typical sets and operators may not yield fruitful results. To handle such problems, the exponential aggregation operators based on neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy sets are proposed. For appropriate decisions in a decision-making problem, it is important to have a handy environment and aggregation operators. Many multi attribute decision making methods often ignore the uncertainty and hence yields the results which are not reliable. The neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy set can efficiently handle the complex information in a decision-making problem, as it combines the advantages of neutrosophic cubic set and hesitant fuzzy set. In this paper first we establish exponential operational laws in neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy sets, in which the exponents are neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy numbers and bases are positive real numbers. In order to use neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy sets in decision making, we are developing exponential aggregation operators and investigate their properties in the current study. In many multi expert decision-making methods there are different decision matrices but same weighting vector for attributes. The results of a multi expert decision-making problem becomes more reliable if every decision expert has its own decision matrix along with his own weighting vector for attributes. In this study, we are developing multi expert decision-making method that uses different weights for an attribute corresponding to different experts. At the end we present two applications of exponential aggregation operators in environmental protection multi attribute decision making problems.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Decision making is one of the crucial problems in real life. Aggregation operators are fundamental tools in decision making. The industrial zone site selection and solid waste disposal site selection are two important and challenging multi attribute environmental protection problems especially for developing countries. Poor management of municipal solid waste leads to environmental and water pollution which would harm to human and wildlife. Different sets and their generalizations like fuzzy set (FS), interval valued fuzzy set (IVFS), intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS), interval intuitionistic fuzzy set (IIFS) hesitant fuzzy set (HFS), neutrosophic set (NS), neutrosophic cubic set (NCS), and several aggregation operators have been defined so for. Zadeh1 introduced the notion of FS as a generalization of classical set. He further extended the idea to IVFS2. Chen3 in 1992 proposed fuzzy MADM methods and discussed their applications in economics. Chen4 proposed the fuzzy extension of TOPSIS method for MADM problems. Xia5 established a novel MADM method. Chang and Wang6 in 2009 discussed the applications of fuzzy MADM in successful knowledge development. Attanassov7 introduced non-membership degree and proposed IFS. Dey et al.8 proposed MADM techniques in IFSs. Later the IFS was further extended to IIFS9. Mondal and Pramanik10 established intuitionistic fuzzy multi criteria group decision making approach to quality-brick selection problem. Different researchers established similarity measures and other important concepts and successfully apply their models to medical diagnosis and selection criteria. Krohling and Campanharo11 established different useful techniques to sort out MADM problems. Pramanik and Mondal12 established weighted fuzzy similarity measure based on tangent function and its application to medical diagnosis. Xu13 proposed some similarity measures of IFS for MADM.
Jun14 in 2012 combined interval value fuzzy set and fuzzy set to form cubic set. The cubic set is generalization of intuitionistic fuzzy set and interval intuitionistic fuzzy set. Cubic set become vital tool to deal the vague data. Several researchers15,16,17 explored algebraic aspects and apparently define ideal theory in cubic sets. Smarandache initiated the concept of indeterminacy and describes the notion of neutrosophic set (NS)18. An NS consists of three components truth, indeterminacy and falsehood. All the three components are independent of each other. This characteristic of NS enabled researchers to deal with inconsistent and vague data more efficiently. For engineering purposes, the NS is strict to [0,1] and called single valued neutrosophic set presented by Wang et al.19. The NS was further extended to interval neutrosophic set (INS)20. After the appearance of NS, researchers put their contributions in theoretical as well as technological developments of the set. Several researchers use neutrosophic and interval valued neutrosophic environments to construct MADM. Ye21 proposed similarity measures between INSs for MADM. Biswas et al., established useful MADM techniques using entropy and similarity measures in neutrosophic environment 22,23,24. Kharal25 established a multi-criteria decision making method in neutrosophic environment. Li26 proposed novel neutrosophic number Einstein aggregation operators for MADM problems. Mondal and Pramanik27 established neutrosophic decision making model for clay-brick selection in construction field based on grey relational analysis. Saha and Broumi28 established some new aggregation operators in INSs. Zhan et al.29 define aggregation operators and furnished some applications in MADM.
Torra30 defined hesitant fuzzy set. Hesitant fuzzy set is basically a function set on X that when applied to X returns a subset of [0,1]. Jun31 in 2015 introduced the concept of neutrosophic cubic set (NCS) which consists of both INS and NS. These characteristics of NCS make it a powerful tool to deal the vague and inconsistent data more efficiently. Soon after its exploration it attracted the researcher to work in many fields like medicine, algebra, engineering, decision making theory. Al-Shumrani32 discussed the stability analysis in neutrosophic cubic set with some applications. Cui and Ye 33 proposed logarithmic similarity measure of dynamic NCS and discussed their applications in medical diagnosis. Khan et al.34 established exponential aggregation operators in neutrosophic cubic environment and applied them in MADM problems. Later the idea of cubic hesitant fuzzy set was introduced by Mehmood et al.35. Ye36,37 established similarity measures in neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy set (NHFS) and discussed its applications in MADM. Liu and Luo38 established some new aggregation operators of NHFS for MADM problems. Saha et al.39, proposed hesitant triangular neutrosophic numbers and their applications to MADM. Liu and Shi40 proposed hybrid geometric aggregation operators in interval valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy sets and discuss its applications in MADM. Biswas et al.41, established useful MADM techniques using NHFSs.
Zhu et al.42 introduced the method of β-normalization to add some values to a hesitant fuzzy element (HFE), which is a useful technique in case of different cardinalities. Ye43 proposed new exponential operations and aggregation operators of interval neutrosophic sets for MADM. Lu and Ye44 introduced exponential laws in single valued neutrosophic numbers. Later the exponential aggregation operators were introduced and applied in typhoon disaster evaluation by Tan et al.45. Wang and Li46 proposed some aggregation operators in pictures hesitant fuzzy set and compared these operators with some existing decision-making methods. Tan and Zhang47 introduced trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers arithmetic averaging and hybrid arithmetic averaging for MADM. Saha et al.48, established q-rung orthopair fuzzy weighted aggregation operators for MADM. Feng et al.49 define type-2 hesitant fuzzy sets and explore some important properties of these sets. Turkarslan et al.50, in 2021 proposed the similarity measures in fuzzy multiset with application in medical diagnosis. Saha and Makharjee51 defined soft interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy rough sets and discussed some interesting properties of these sets. Senapati et al.52, proposed some novel interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators based on Hamachar triangular norms for MADM. Recently WASPAS technique using picture fuzzy sets for MADM problems was established by Senapati et al.53. Wang et al.46, defined picture hesitant fuzzy sets and discussed their applications in MADM. Xia and Xu5 established novel MADM method. Several researchers29,54,55,56 established many useful techniques for MADM problems.
The NCS consider the truth, indeterminacy and falsity independently but is unable to handle the hesitant factor in each component. On the other hand, HFS is more flexible in choosing membership grades. Recently Rehman et al., defined NCHFS57 and geometric aggregation operators of NCHFS for MADM problems. The NCHFS can efficiently handle the complex information in a decision-making problem, as it combines the advantages of NCS and HFS. More recently, Rehman et al.58, established Dombi exponential aggregation operators in NCHFS and discussed their properties in solid waste disposal site selection. Also see59,60.
Motivation
The industries play an important role in economic growth and prosperity of the people of a region. But there must be a need of proper planning to minimize the negative impacts of industry like pollution. Waste material is direct consequence of urbanization and population increase. The proper disposal of waste is necessary for prevention of viral diseases like typhoid, dengue and tuberculosis. The increase in population and urbanization is exponential so the exponential operational laws and aggregation operators are needed. Regarding to waste material, the information is inconsistent, incomplete and insufficient. These situations can efficiently be handled by NCHFS.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. “Preliminaries” deals with some basic definitions used later. In “Operational laws in neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy set” we discuss NCHFS and algebraic operational laws in NCHFS. In “Exponential operational laws in NCHFSs” we introduced exponential operational laws and some useful results in NCHFS. “Exponential aggregation operators” deals with exponential aggregation operators and their properties in NCHFS. In “Applications of neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy weighted exponential aggregation operator to MADM and ME-MADM problems” we establish a MCDM method based on NCHFEA operators and use this method in MCDM problem.
Preliminaries
Definition 1
(Ref.21) A fuzzy set (FS) on a nonempty set W is a mapping \(\Gamma :W\to [\mathrm{0,1}]\).
Definition 2
(Ref.16) The cubic set (CS) on a nonempty set Z is defined by \(\mu =\langle x;I\left(x\right),\delta (x)/x\in X\rangle \), where \(I(x)\) is an IVFS on Z and \(\delta (x)\) is an FS on Z.
Definition 3
(Ref.30) A neutrosophic set associated with a crisp set S, is a set of the form \(\mu =\langle e;{\xi }_{T}\left(e\right),{\xi }_{I}\left(e\right),{\xi }_{F}\left(e\right)/e\in S\rangle \) where \({\xi }_{T},{\xi }_{I},{\xi }_{F}:S\to [\mathrm{0,1}]\) respectively called a truth membership function, a non-membership function and a false membership function.
Definition 4
(Ref.17) A neutrosophic cubic set in a nonempty set E is defined as a pair \((B,\mu )\) where \(B=\langle x;{B}_{T}\left(e\right),{B}_{I}\left(e\right),{B}_{F}\left(e\right)/e\in E\rangle \) is an INS and \(\mu =\langle x;{\mu }_{T}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{I}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{F}\left(e\right)/e\in X\rangle \) is a NS.
Definition 5
(Ref.5) A neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy set a nonempty set E is described as \(\mu =\langle x;{\mu }_{T}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{I}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{F}\left(e\right)/e\in E\rangle \) where \({\mu }_{T}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{I}\left(e\right),{\mu }_{F}\left(e\right)\) are three HFSs such that \({\mu }_{T}\left(e\right)+{\mu }_{I}\left(e\right)+{\mu }_{F}\left(e\right)\le 3\).
Definition 6
(Ref.38) The object \(\zeta =\langle x;{\xi }_{T}\left(x\right),{\xi }_{I}\left(x\right),{\xi }_{F}\left(x\right)/x\in X\rangle \), s called an INHFS on X, where \({\xi }_{T}\left(x\right),{\xi }_{I}\left(x\right),{\xi }_{F}\left(x\right)\) are IHFSs.
Zhu et al. proposed the following β-normalization method to enlarge a hesitant fuzzy element, which is a useful technique in case of different cardinalities.
Definition 7
(Ref.1) Let \({m}^{+}\) and \({m}^{-}\) be the maximum and minimum elements of a hesitant fuzzy set H and \(\zeta (0\le \zeta \le 1)\) an optimized parameter. We call \(m=\zeta {m}^{+}+(1-\zeta ){m}^{-}\) an added element.
Definition 8
(Ref.40) Let \(A=\langle x,{T}_{x},{T}_{x},{F}_{x}\rangle \) be a SVNS. Then exponential laws in A are defined by
Definition 9
(Ref.52) Let \(A=\langle x,\left[{A}_{T}^{L}(x),{A}_{T}^{U}(x)\right],\left[{A}_{I}^{L}(x),{A}_{I}^{U}(x)\right],\left[{A}_{F}^{L}(x),{A}_{F}^{U}(x)\right]\rangle \) be an IVNS. Then exponential laws in A are defined by
Operational laws in neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy set
In this section operational laws on NCHFS are defined. These operational laws will help to define the proposed aggregations operators.
Definition 10
Let X be a nonempty set. A neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy set in X is a pair \(\beta = \left\langle {B,\,\mu } \right\rangle\) where \(B = \left\{ {\left\langle {x;\,B_{T} (x),\,B_{I} (x),\,B_{F} (x)} \right\rangle /x \in X} \right\}\) is an interval-valued neutrosophic hesitant set in X and \(\mu = \left\{ {\left\langle {x;\,\vartheta_{T} (x),\,\vartheta_{I} (x),\,\vartheta_{F} (x)} \right\rangle /x \in X} \right\}\) is a neutrosophic hesitant set in X.
Furthermore \(A_{T} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{T} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{T} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1,...,\,l} \right\},\,A_{I} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{I} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{I} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1,...,\,m} \right\},\,A_{F} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{F} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{F} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1,...,\,n} \right\}\) are some interval values in unit interval [0,1] and \(\mu_{T} = \left\{ {\mu_{{j_{T} }} ;\,j = 1,...,\,p} \right\},\,\mu_{I} = \left\{ {\mu_{{j_{I} }} ;\,j = 1,...,\,q} \right\},\,\mu_{F} = \left\{ {\mu_{{j_{F} }} ;\,j = 1,...,\,r} \right\}\) are some values in unit interval [0,1].
Example 1
Let \(X = \left\{ {x,\,y,\,z} \right\}\) The pair \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) with
is a NCHFS.
Definition 11
The sum and product of two NCHFSs \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle ,\,\beta = \left\langle {B,\,\mu } \right\rangle\) is defined as
Moreover the \(\beta \)-normalization is used in case of different cardinalities.
Definition 12
The scalar multiplication of a scalar q with a NCHFS \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) is defined by
Theorem 1
For NCHFS \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) and a scalar q, we have
where \(\alpha^{q} = \alpha \otimes \alpha \otimes \cdots \otimes \alpha (q{\text{ - times}}).\) moreover \(\alpha^{q}\) is a neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy value for every positive value of q.
Definition 13
The score, accuracy, and certainty of a NCHF value \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) where \(A = \left( {A_{T} ,\,A_{I} ,\,A_{F} } \right),A_{T} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{T} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{T} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,l} \right\},\,A_{I} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{I} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{I} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,m} \right\},A_{F} = \left\{ {[A_{{j_{F} }}^{L} ,\,A_{{j_{F} }}^{U} ];\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,n} \right\}\) and \(\lambda = (\lambda_{T} ,\,\lambda_{I} ,\,\lambda_{F} ),\lambda_{T} = \left\{ {\lambda_{{j_{T} }} ;\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,p} \right\},\,\lambda_{I} = \left\{ {\lambda_{{j_{I} }} ;\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,q} \right\},\lambda_{F} = \left\{ {\lambda_{{j_{F} }} ;\,j = 1, \ldots ,\,r} \right\}\) are defined as:
Remark
(i) It is evident from the above definition that for any NCHF value \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\), \(S(\alpha ) \in [0,1]\), \(H(\alpha ) \in [ - 1,1]\) and \(C(\alpha ) \in [0,1]\).
(ii) If \(\Omega =\left(\left\{\left[\mathrm{1,1}\right]\right\},\left\{[\mathrm{1,1}]\right\},\left\{[\mathrm{0,0}]\right\},\left\{1\right\},\left\{1\right\},\left\{0\right\}\right)\) and \(\Psi =\left(\left\{\left[\mathrm{0,0}\right]\right\},\left\{[\mathrm{0,0}]\right\},\left\{[\mathrm{1,1}]\right\},\left\{0\right\},\left\{0\right\},\left\{1\right\}\right)\) are respectively the maximum and minimum ideal NCHF values. Then \(S(\Omega ) = 1,S(\Psi ) = 0\), \(H(\Omega ) = 1,H(\Psi ) = - 1\), \(C(\Omega ) = 1,C(\Psi ) = 0\).
If \(\alpha = \left\langle {\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.5],[0.2,\,0.7]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.2,\,0.3],[0.1,\,0.6]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.4],[0,\,0.3]} \right\},\{ 0.1,\,0.2\} ,\{ 0.3,\,0.5\} ,\{ 0.4,\,0.8\} } \right\rangle ,\) and \(\beta = \left\langle {\left\{ {[0.4,\,0.5],[0.3,\,0.4]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.3],[0.2,\,0.5]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.4],[0.7,\,0.8]} \right\},\{ 0.3,\,0.5\} ,\{ 0.7,\,0.8\} ,\{ 0.4,\,0.6\} } \right\rangle ,\) then \(S(\alpha ) = 0.370833,\,S(\beta ) = 0.545833,\,H(\alpha ) = - 0.03333,\,H(\beta ) = - 0.1,C(\alpha ) = 0.3,C(\beta ) = 0.4 .\)
Figure 1 provides the graphical interpretation of score, accuracy and cetainty functions of NCHF values. The value with greater score is defined to be greater than other.
Definition 14
Let \(\alpha =\langle A,\lambda \rangle ,\beta =\langle B,\mu \rangle \) are two NCHFSs. We say that \(\alpha >\beta \) if \(S(\alpha )>S(\beta )\). If \(S\left(\alpha \right)=S(\beta )\), then \(\alpha >\beta \) if \(A(\alpha )>A(\beta )\). If \(A\left(\alpha \right)=A(\beta )\), then \(\alpha >\beta \) if \(C(\alpha )>C(\beta )\). If \(S\left(\alpha \right)=S\left(\beta \right), A\left(\alpha \right)=A\left(\beta \right),C(\alpha )>C(\beta )\), then \(\alpha =\beta \).
In the next section we define exponential operational laws in neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy set and prove some elegant results.
Exponential operational laws in NCHFSs
Definition 15
For NCHFS \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) and a scalar \(q>0\), we define
If \(\alpha >\beta \), then \({q}^{\alpha }>{q}^{\beta }\).
Example 2
\(\alpha = \left\langle {\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.5],[0.2,\,0.7]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.2,\,0.3],[0.1,\,0.6]} \right\},\left\{ {[0.1,\,0.4],[0.0,\,0.3]} \right\},\{ 0.1,\,0.2\} ,\{ 0.3,\,0.5\} ,\{ 0.4,\,0.8\} } \right\rangle\), then using above definition with q = 0.5 we have
Theorem 2
For a NCHFN \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle\) and a scalar \(q>0\), \(q^{\alpha }\) is a NCHFN.
Theorem 3
For two NCHFNs \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle ,\,\beta = \left\langle {B,\,\mu } \right\rangle\) and a scalar \(q\in (\mathrm{0,1})\), we have.
(i) \(q^{\alpha } \oplus q^{\beta } = q^{\beta } \oplus q^{\alpha } ,\) (ii) \(q^{\alpha } \otimes q^{\beta } = q^{\beta } \otimes q^{\alpha }\).
Proof
(i)
(ii)
Theorem 4
For three NCHFNs \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle ,\,\beta = \left\langle {B,\,\mu } \right\rangle ,\gamma = \left\langle {C,\nu } \right\rangle\) and a scalar \(q\in (\mathrm{0,1})\), we have.
(i) \(\left( {q^{\alpha } \oplus q^{\beta } } \right) \oplus q^{\gamma } = q^{\beta } \oplus \left( {q^{\alpha } \oplus q^{\gamma } } \right) ,\) (ii) \(\left( {q^{\alpha } \otimes q^{\beta } } \right) \otimes q^{\gamma } = q^{\beta } \otimes \left( {q^{\alpha } \otimes q^{\gamma } } \right)\)
Proof: (i)
Theorem 5
For three NCHFNs \(\alpha = \left\langle {A,\,\lambda } \right\rangle ,\,\beta = \left\langle {B,\,\mu } \right\rangle ,\gamma = \left\langle {C,\nu } \right\rangle\), a scalar \(q,{q}_{1}\in (\mathrm{0,1})\), and \(k,{k}_{1},{k}_{2}>0\), we have.
-
(i)
\(k\left( {q^{\alpha } \oplus q^{\beta } } \right) = kq^{\alpha } \oplus kq^{\beta }\),
-
(ii)
\(\left( {q^{\alpha } \otimes q^{\beta } } \right)^{k} = \left( {q^{\alpha } } \right)^{k} \otimes \left( {q^{\beta } } \right)^{k}\),
-
(iii)
\(\left( {k_{1} + k_{2} } \right)q^{\alpha } = k_{1} q^{\alpha } \oplus k_{2} q^{\alpha }\),
-
(iv)
\(\left( {q^{\alpha } } \right)^{{k_{1} }} \otimes \left( {q^{\alpha } } \right)^{{k_{2} }} = \left( {q^{\alpha } } \right)^{{k_{1} + k_{2} }}\),
-
(v)
\(q^{\alpha } \otimes q_{1}^{\alpha } = \left( {qq_{1} } \right)^{\alpha }\)
Proof
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
Exponential aggregation operators
Definition 16
Let \(\left\{ {\alpha_{(k)} = \left\langle {A_{(k)} ,\,\lambda_{(k)} } \right\rangle } \right\}\) be a collection of NCHFNs and \(q_{k} \in (0,1)\) be real numbers, then Neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy weighted exponential aggregation operator is defined as \(NCHWEA(\alpha_{1} ,\,\alpha_{2} ,...,\,\alpha_{n} ) = \mathop \otimes \limits_{j = 1}^{n} \left( {q_{j} } \right)^{{\alpha_{j} }}\) and \(\left\{ {\alpha_{(k)} = \left\langle {A_{(k)} ,\,\lambda_{(k)} } \right\rangle } \right\}\) are the exponential weighting vector of attribute values \(q_{k} \in (0,1)\).
Theorem 6
Let \(\left\{ {\alpha_{(k)} = \left\langle {A_{(k)} ,\,\lambda_{(k)} } \right\rangle } \right\}\) be a collection of NCHFNs and \(q_{k} \in (0,1)\) be real numbers, then Neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy weighted exponential aggregation operator is
\(\left\{ {\alpha_{(k)} = \left\langle {A_{(k)} ,\,\lambda_{(k)} } \right\rangle } \right\}\) are the exponential weighting vectors of attribute values \(q_{k} \in (0,1)\). Furthermore \(NCHFHG(\alpha_{1} ,\,\alpha_{2} , \ldots ,\,\alpha_{m} )\) is also a neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy value.
Proof
Using induction we have,\(NCHFWEA(\alpha_{1} ,\,\alpha_{2} ) = \mathop \otimes \limits_{j = 1}^{2} \left( {q_{j} } \right)^{{\alpha_{j} }}\).
For m = n we have
we prove for m = n + 1
Applications of neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy weighted exponential aggregation operator to MADM and ME-MADM problems
Many methods in MADM ignore the uncertainty and hence yield the results which are unreliable. In this section we construct algorithms using the exponential aggregation (NCHFWE) for MADM and ME-MADM problems.
Algorithm 6.1 (MADM problems)
Step 1: Identification of alternatives and attributes.
Let \(\left\{{F}_{1},{F}_{2},\dots ,{F}_{r}\right\}\) be the set of r alternatives, \(\left\{{K}_{1},{K}_{2},\dots ,{K}_{s}\right\}\) be s attributes. The NCHFS \({\alpha }_{j}\) is used as weight for the attribute \({K}_{j}\). A decision matrix is \(D=({d}_{ij})\) consisting fuzzy values, where \({d}_{ij}\) represent the preference of alternative \({F}_{i}\) corresponding to attribute \({K}_{j}\).
Step 2. Allocation of weights to attributes
The NCHF value \({{\alpha }_{j}}^{(k)}\) is used as weight assigned to attribute \({K}_{j}\) by expert \({E}_{k}\).
Step 3. Computation of weighted aggregated values
Using NCHFWEA operators, we compute the aggregated values \({d}_{j}{^{\prime}}s\) (j = 1,…,r) of alternatives \({F}_{j}{^{\prime}}s\).
Step 4. Ranking of Alternatives
We calculate the scores \({S(d}_{j});j=1,\dots ,r\) of the alternatives \({F}_{j};i=1,\dots ,r\). Using scores \({S(d}_{i});i=1,\dots ,n,\) we rank the alternatives \({F}_{i};i=1,\dots ,n\). If scores of two alternatives are equal, then we use accuracy function for ranking and if they have same accuracy, we use certainty.
Flow chart:
Application in industrial zone site selection
Using above defined algorithm to select the best alternative (site for industrial zone) among the given alternatives (sites) \({F}_{1},\dots ,{F}_{5}\) on the basis of attributes (i) \({K}_{1}\) is damage to environment; (ii) \({K}_{2}\) is effect on public safety; (iii) \({K}_{3}\) is effect on wildlife safety. Following is the decision matrix decision matrix \(D=({d}_{ij}{)}_{5\times 3}\), where entry \({d}_{ij}\) represents the preference of alternative \({F}_{i}(i=1,\dots ,5)\) corresponding to attribute \({K}_{j}(j=\mathrm{1,2},3)\),
The weights of the attributes are given as:
The explanation of weights is elaborated as;
In case of \({w}_{1}\), {[0.3,0.7],[0.2,0.4]} is interval hesitant degree of preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {[0.2,0.5],[0.1,0.6]} is interval hesitant degree of indeterminacy (preference/ non-preference) for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {[0.2,0.4],[0,0.1]} is interval hesitant degree of non-preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.1,0.6}} is hesitant degree of preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.2,0.4} is hesitant degree of indeterminacy (preference/ non-preference) for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.4,0.6} is hesitant degree of non-preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\).
Aggregated values of alternatives
Scores \({S(d}_{i})\)
\(S(d_{1} ) = 0.176782,S(d_{2} ) = 0.694794,S(d_{3} ) = 0.19038,S(d_{4} ) = 0.523417,S(d_{5} ) = 0.537091\).
Ranking of alternatives
As \(S\left({d}_{2}\right)>S\left({d}_{5}\right)>S\left({d}_{4}\right)>S({d}_{3})>S({d}_{1})\), so that the most desirable alternative is \({F}_{2}\).
Figure 2 shows the score function of aggregated values.
Figure 2 elaborate graphically the ordering of aggregated values based on score functions. The alternative \({F}_{2}\) has the highest score and hence is the most desirable or best alternative.
Many ME-MADM methods use the same weights for each attribute corresponding to each decision maker. The following method use different weights for each expert.
Algorithm 6.3: (ME-MADM problems)
Step 1: Identification of alternatives and attributes
Let \(\left\{{F}_{1},{F}_{2},\dots ,{F}_{r}\right\}\) be the set of r alternatives, \(\left\{{K}_{1},{K}_{2},\dots ,{K}_{s}\right\}\) be s attributes. The NCHFS \({\alpha }_{j}\) is used as weight for the attribute \({K}_{j}\). Let \(\left\{{E}_{1},{E}_{2},\dots ,{E}_{m}\right\}\) be the decision experts. The decision matrix is \({D}^{(k)}=({{d}_{ij}}^{(k)})\) consisting fuzzy values, where \({d}_{ij}\) represent the preference given by the kth expert \({E}_{k}\) to alternative \({F}_{i}\) corresponding to attribute \({K}_{j}\).
Step 2. Allocation of weights to attributes
The NCHF value \({{\alpha }_{j}}^{(k)}\) is used as weight assigned to attribute \({K}_{j}\) by expert \({E}_{k}\).
Step 3: Computation of weighted aggregated values
Using NCHFWEA operators, compute the aggregated values \({{d}_{j}}^{(k)}{^{\prime}}s\) (j = 1,…,r; k = 1,..m) of alternatives \({F}_{j}{^{\prime}}s\) on the bases of weights assigned by experts.
Step 4: Transformations of \({{{\varvec{d}}}_{{\varvec{j}}}}^{({\varvec{k}})}{^{\prime}}{\varvec{s}}\) to \({{\varvec{d}}}_{{\varvec{j}}}{^{\prime}}{\varvec{s}}\)
The transformation is based on the formula \({d}_{j}={{u}_{1}}^{{{d}_{j}}^{(1)}}\otimes \dots \otimes {{u}_{m}}^{{{d}_{j}}^{(m)}}\), where \({u}_{k}\) (k = 1,..m) is the weight assigned to expert \({E}_{k}\).
Step 5. Ranking of Alternatives
We calculate the scores \({S(d}_{j});j=1,\dots ,r\) of the aggregated values. Using scores \({S(d}_{i});i=1,\dots ,n\),we rank the alternatives \({F}_{i};i=1,\dots ,n\). If scores of two alternatives are equal, then we use accuracy function for ranking and if they have same accuracy, we use certainty.
Flow Chart:
Solid waste disposal site selection
Using above defined algorithm to select the best alternative (solid waste disposal site) among the given alternatives (sites) \({F}_{1},\dots ,{F}_{4}\) on the basis of attributes (i) \({K}_{1}\) is water pollution; (ii) \({K}_{2}\) slope; (iii) \({K}_{3}\) distance from residential area. Following are the decision matrices \({D}^{(k)}=({d}_{ij}{)}_{4\times 3}\), where entry \({d}_{ij}\) represents the preference given by the expert \({E}_{k}\) (k = 1,2) to \({F}_{i}(i=1,\dots ,4)\) corresponding to \({K}_{j}(j=\mathrm{1,2},3)\).
The weights for attributes given by experts are:
The explanation of weights is elaborated as;
In case of \({{w}_{1}}^{(2)}\), {[0.4,0.6],[0.3,0.4]} is interval hesitant degree of preference to attribute \({K}_{1}\), {[0.3,0.4],[0.1,0.2]} is interval hesitant degree of indeterminacy (preference/ non-preference) for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {[0.2,0.5],[0,0.1]} is interval hesitant degree of non-preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.4,0.6}} is hesitant degree of preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.2,0.4} is hesitant degree of indeterminacy (preference/ non-preference) for attribute \({K}_{1}\), {0.3,0.5} is hesitant degree of non-preference for attribute \({K}_{1}\), given by second expert.
Aggregated values of alternatives
Transformed aggregated values
Using weights \({u}_{1}={u}_{2}=0.5\) for experts, we have
Scores \({S(d}_{i})\)
\(S\left({d}_{1}\right)=0.369,S\left({d}_{2}\right)=0.383,S\left({d}_{3}\right)=0.503,S\left({d}_{4}\right)=0.420\).
Ranking of alternatives
As \(S\left({d}_{3}\right)>S\left({d}_{4}\right)>S({d}_{2})>S({d}_{1})\), so that the most desirable alternative is \({F}_{3}\).
Figure 3 shows the score function of expert aggregated values and transformed aggregated.
The Fig. 3 is a graphical reflection of scores of aggregated values corresponding to each expert and transformed aggregated values. The figure reflects that the alternative \({F}_{3}\) has the highest score of transformed aggregated value and hence the most desirable or best alternative while \({F}_{1}\) is the worse alternative.
Comparative analysis
The industrial zone site selection problem is solved by some existing techniques and findings are presented in the following table.
Table 1 indicate that the proposed method agrees with existing methods in all alternatives. This also validate the validity of proposed method as well.
Conclusion
In this study, first we proposed exponential operational laws in NCHFS and investigates the fundamental properties of these exponential laws. Using these exponential laws, the exponential aggregation operators are proposed in the environment of NCHFS, which is a useful addition in the family of aggregation operators. Then we established a method to solve complex ME-MADM problem where each expert has its own decision matrix along with his own weighting vector for attributes. Finally, the proposed method is applied to the industrial zone site selection and solid waste disposal site selections are problems.
Data availability
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study does not use any specific data.
References
Zadeh, L. A. Fuzzy sets. Inform. Control. 8, 338–353 (1965).
Zadeh, L. A. Outlines of new approach to the analysis of complex system and decision process interval valued fuzzy sets. IEEE Trans. (1968).
Chen, S. J. & Hwang, C. L. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making, methods and applications; lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems 375 (Springer, Berlin, 1992).
Chen, C. T. Extension of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 114, 1–9 (2000).
Xia, M. & Xu, Z. A novel method for fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 3, 497–519 (2014).
Chang, T. H. & Wang, T. C. Using the fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for measuring the possibility of successful knowledge management. Inf. Sci. 179, 355–370 (2009).
Atanassov, K. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20, 87–96 (1986).
Dey, P. P., Pramanik, S. & Giri, B. C. Multi-criteria group decision making in intuitionistic fuzzy environment based on grey relational analysis for weaver selection in Khadi institution. J. Appl. Quant. Methods. 10, 1–14 (2015).
Atanassov, K. & Gargov, G. Interval intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 31, 343–349 (1989).
Mondal, K. & Pramanik, S. Intuitionistic fuzzy multi criteria group decision making approach to quality-brick selection problem. J. Appl. Quant. Methods. 9, 35–50 (2014).
Krohling, R. A. & Campanharo, V. C. Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 4190–4197 (2011).
Pramanik, S. & Mondal, K. Weighted fuzzy similarity measure based on tangent function and its application to medical diagnosis. Int. J. Innovat. Res. Sci. Engg. Tech. 4, 158–164 (2015).
Xu, Z. Some similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their applications to multiple attribute decision making. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 6, 109–121 (2007).
Jun, Y. B., Kim, C. S. & Yang, K. O. Cubic sets. Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 1, 83–98 (2012).
Jun, Y. B., Kim, C. S. & Kang, M. S. Cubic sub-algebras and ideals of BCK/BCI-algebras. Far East. J. Math. Sci. (FJMS) 44, 239–250 (2010).
Jun, Y. B., Kim, C. S. & Kang, M. S. Cubic q-ideals of BCI-algebras. Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 1, 25–34 (2011).
Jun, Y. B., Lee, K. J. & Kang, M. S. Cubic structures applied to ideals of BCI-algebras. Comput. Math. Appl. 62, 3334–3342 (2011).
Smarandache, F. A unifying field in logics neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic (American Research Press, 1999).
Wang, H. & Smarandache, F. Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 1, 410–413 (2010).
Wang, H., Smarandache, F., Zhang, Y. Q., & Sunderraman, R. Interval neutrosophic sets and logics, Hexis, Phoenix, USA (2005).
Ye, J. Similarity measures between interval neutrosophic sets and their multi criteria decision-making method. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 26, 165–172 (2014).
Biswas, P., Pramanik, S. & Giri, B. C. A new methodology for neutrosophic multi-attribute decision-making with unknown weight information. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 3, 44–54 (2014).
Biswas, P., Pramanik, S. & Giri, B. C. Cosine similarity measure based multi-attribute decision-making with trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 8, 46–56 (2014).
Biswas, P., Pramanik, S. & Giri, B. C. Entropy based grey relational analysis method for multi-attribute decision making under single valued neutrosophic assessments. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 2, 102–110 (2014).
Kharal, A. A neutrosophic multi-criteria decision making method. New Math. Nat. Comput. 10, 143–162 (2014).
Li, B., Wang, J., Yang, L. & Li, X. A novel generalized simplified neutrosophic number einstein aggregation operator. Int. J. Appl. Math. 48, 67–72 (2018).
Mondal, K. & Pramanik, S. Neutrosophic decision making model for clay-brick selection in construction field based on grey relational analysis. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 9, 64–71 (2015).
Saha, A. & Broumi, S. New operators on interval valued neutrosophic sets. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 28, 128–137 (2019).
Zhan, J., Khan, M. & Gulistan, M. Applications of neutrosophic cubic sets in multi-criteria decision-making. Int. J. Uncertain. Quantif. 7, 377–394 (2017).
Torra, V. Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 25, 529–539 (2010).
Jun, Y. B., Smarandache, F., & Kim, C. S. Neutrosophic cubic sets. New. Math. Nat. Comput. (2015)
Al-Shumrani, M. A., Gulistan, M. & Khan, S. The neutro-stability analysis of neutrosophic cubic sets with application in decision making problems. J. Math. 1, 1 (2020).
Cui, W. H. & Ye, J. Logrithmic similarity measure of dynamic neutrosophic cubic sets and its application to medical diagnosis. Comput. Ind. 111, 198–206 (2019).
Khan, M., Beg, I. & Gulistan, M. Exponential laws and aggregation operators in neutrosophic cubic sets. IJNS. 4, 47–71 (2020).
Mehmood, T., Mehmood, F. & Khan, Q. Cubic hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications to multi criteria decision making. Int. J. Algebra Stat. 5, 19–51 (2016).
Ye, J. Multiple-attribute decision-making method under a single valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy environment. J. Intell. Syst. (2014).
Ye, J. Multiple-attribute decision-making method using similarity measures of single-valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy sets based on least common multiple cardinality. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 34, 4203–4211 (2018).
Liu, C. F. & Luo, Y. S. New aggregation operators of single-valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy set and their application in multi-attribute decision making. Pattern Anal. Appl. 22, 417–427 (2017).
Saha, A., Deli, I. & Broumi, S. Hesitant triangular neutrosophic numbers and their applications to MADM. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 35, 269–298 (2020).
Liu, P. & Shi, L. The generalized hybrid weighted average operator based on interval neutrosophic hesitant set and its application to multiple attribute decision making. Neural Comput. Appl. 26, 457–471 (2015).
Biswas, P., Pramanik, S. & Giri, B. C. NH-MADM strategy in neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy set environment based on extended GRA. Informatica 30(2), 213–242 (2019).
Zhu, B., Xu, Z. S. & Xu, J. P. Deriving a ranking from hesitant fuzzy preference relations under group decision making. IEEE Trans. Cyber. 44(8), 1 (2014).
Ye, J. Exponential operations and aggregation operators of interval neutrosophic sets and their decision making methods. Springerplus 5, 1488 (2016).
Lu, Z. & Ye, J. Exponential operations and an aggregation method for single-valued neutrosophic numbers in decision making. Information 8(2), 62 (2017).
Tan, R., Zhang, W. & Chen, S. Exponential aggregation operator of interval neutrosophic numbers and its application in typhoon disaster evaluation. Symmetry. 10(6), 196 (2018).
Wang, R., Li, Y. & Chen, C. Picture hesitant fuzzy set and its application to multiple criteria decision making. Symmetry. 10, 1 (2018).
Tan, R. & Zhang, W. Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 33, 2547–2564 (2017).
Saha, A., Majumder, P., Dutta, D. & Debnath, B. K. Multi-attribute decision making using q-rung fuzzy weighted fairly aggregation operators. J. Ambient Intell. Human Comput. 12, 8149–8171 (2020).
Feng, L., Chuan, F. & Wei, X. Type-2 hesitant fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Inf. Engg. 10, 249–259 (2018).
Turkarslan, E., Ye, J., Unver, M. & Olgun, M. Consistency fuzzy sets and a cosine similarity measure in fuzzy multiset setting and application to medical diagnosis. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 1–9 (2021).
Saha, A. & Makherjee, A. Soft interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy rough sets. Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 9, 79–92 (2015).
Senapati, T. & Chen, G. Some novel interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators based on Hamachar triangular norms and their application in MADM issues. Comput. Appl. Math. 40, 1–27 (2021).
Senapati, T. & Chen, G. Picture fuzzy WASPAS technique and its application in multi-criteria decision-making. 26, 4413–4421 (2022).
Turksen, I. B. Interval valued strict preferences with Zadeh triplet. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 78, 183–195 (1996).
Ye, J. Multiple attribute group decision-making method with completely unknown weights based on similarity measures under single valued neutrosophic environment. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 27, 2927–2935 (2014).
Zhang, G. & Lu, J. An integrated group decision-making method dealing with fuzzy preferences for alternatives and individual judgments for selection criteria. Group Decis. Negot. 12, 501–515 (2003).
Rehman, A., Guistan, M., Khan, Z. & Al-Duas, F. S. A study of neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy hybrid geometric aggregation operators and its application to multi expert decision making system. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 50, 83–110 (2022).
Rehman, A. et al. Novel development to the theory of Dombi exponential aggregation operators in neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy sets: application to solid waste disposal site selection. Complexity 2022, 1–16 (2022).
Mehlawat, M. K. & Guptal, P. A. A new fuzzy group multi-criteria decision making method with an application to the critical path selection. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 83, 1281–1296 (2016).
Mondal, K. & Pramanik, S. Multi-criteria group decision making approach for teacher recruitment in higher education under simplified neutrosophic environment. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 6, 28–34 (2014).
Acknowledgements
The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University for funding this work through the Large Group Research Project under grant number (R.G.P.2/181/44).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.R.: conceptualization, methodology, original draft preparation. M.G.: writing, reviewing and editing. M.A.: reviewing and editing. M.M.A.: reviewing and editing. S.A.: validation of results, writing of reviewing and editing.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Rehman, A.U., Gulistan, M., Ali, M. et al. Development of neutrosophic cubic hesitant fuzzy exponential aggregation operators with application in environmental protection problems. Sci Rep 13, 5262 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22399-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22399-3
This article is cited by
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.