A novel multi-criteria group decision-making approach using aggregation operators and weight determination method for supplier selection problem in hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uncertainty is an important factor in the decision-making process. Hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy sets (HPFS), a combination of Pythagorean and hesitant fuzzy sets, proved as a significant tool to handle uncertainty. Well-defined operational laws and attribute weights play an important role in decision-making. Thus, the paper aims to develop new Trigonometric Operational Laws, a weight determination method, and a novel score function for group decision-making (GDM) problems in the HPF environment. The approach is presented in three phases. The first phase defines new operational laws with sine trigonometric function incorporating its special properties like periodicity, symmetricity, and restricted range hence compared with previously defined aggregation operators they are more likely to satisfy the decision maker preferences. Properties of trigonometric operational laws (TOL) are studied and various aggregation operators are defined. To measure the relationship between arguments, the operators are combined with the Generalized Heronian Mean operator. The flexibility of operators is increased by the use of a real parameter λ to express the risk preference of experts. The second phase defines a novel weight determination method, which separately considers the membership and non-membership degrees hence reducing the information loss and the third phase conquers the shortcomings of previously defined score functions by defining a novel score function in HPFS. To further increase the flexibility of defined operators they are extended in the environment with unknown or incomplete attribute weights. The effectiveness of the GDM model is verified with the help of a supplier selection problem. A detailed comparative analysis demonstrates the superiority, and sensitivity analysis verifies the stability of the proposed approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".