An innovative fuzzy parameterized MADM approach to site selection for dam construction based on sv-complex neutrosophic hypersoft set

Atiqe Ur Rahman; Muhammad Saeed; Mazin Abed Mohammed; Alaa S Al-Waisy; Seifedine Kadry; Jungeun Kim; Atiqe Ur Rahman; Muhammad Saeed; Mazin Abed Mohammed; Alaa S Al-Waisy; Seifedine Kadry; Jungeun Kim

doi:10.3934/math.2023245

AIMS Mathematics

2023, Volume 8, Issue 2: 4907-4929. doi: 10.3934/math.2023245

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

An innovative fuzzy parameterized MADM approach to site selection for dam construction based on sv-complex neutrosophic hypersoft set

1.
Department of Mathematics, University of Management and Technology, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
2.
College of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Anbar, Anbar 31001, Iraq
3.
Computer Technologies Engineering Department, Information Technology College, Imam Ja'afar Al-Sadiq University, Baghdad, Iraq
4.
Department of Applied Data Science, Noroff University College, Kristiansand 4608, Norway
5.
Artificial Intelligence Research Center (AIRC), College of Engineering and Information Technology, Ajman University, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
6.
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Lebanese American University, Byblos, Lebanon
7.
Department of Software, Kongju National University, Cheonan 31080, Korea

Received: 22 August 2022 Revised: 30 October 2022 Accepted: 08 November 2022 Published: 09 December 2022
MSC : 03B52, 03E72, 90B50

Dams are water reservoirs that provide adequate freshwater to residential, industrial, and mining sites. They are widely used to generate electricity, control flooding, and irrigate agricultural lands. Due to recent urbanization trends, industrialization, and climatic changes, the construction of dams is in dire need, which is planning intensive, quite expensive, and time-consuming. Moreover, finding an appropriate site to construct dams is also considered a challenging task for decision-makers. The dam site selection problem (DSSP) has already been considered a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem under uncertain (fuzzy set) environments by several researchers. However, they ignored some essential evaluating features (e.g., (a) fuzzy parameterized grades, which assess the vague nature of parameters and sub-parameters, (b) the hypersoft setting, which provides multi-argument-based domains for the approximation of alternatives, (c) the complex setting which tackles the periodicity of data, and (d) the single-valued neutrosophic setting which facilitates the decision makers to provide their opinions in three-dimensional aspects) that can be used in DSSP to make it more reliable and trustworthy. Thus this study aims to employ a robust fuzzy parameterized algebraic approach which starts with the characterization of a novel structure "fuzzy parameterized single valued complex neutrosophic hypersoft set ($ \tilde{\lambda} $-set)" that is competent to deal with the above-mentioned features jointly. After that, it integrates the concept of fuzzy parameterization, decision-makers opinions in terms of single-valued complex neutrosophic numbers, and the classical matrix theory to compute the score values for evaluating alternatives. Based on the stages of the proposed approach, an algorithm is proposed, which is further explained by an illustrative example in which DSSP is considered a multiple attributes decision-making (MADM) scenario. The computed score values are then used to evaluate some suitable sites (regions) for dam construction. The computational results of the proposed algorithm are found to be precise and consistent through their comparison with some already developed approaches.
- dam construction,
- dam site selection problem,
- complex setting,
- hypersoft setting,
- single-valued neutrosophic setting,
- fuzzy parameterization
Citation: Atiqe Ur Rahman, Muhammad Saeed, Mazin Abed Mohammed, Alaa S Al-Waisy, Seifedine Kadry, Jungeun Kim. An innovative fuzzy parameterized MADM approach to site selection for dam construction based on sv-complex neutrosophic hypersoft set[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 4907-4929. doi: 10.3934/math.2023245

Related Papers:

Abstract

Dams are water reservoirs that provide adequate freshwater to residential, industrial, and mining sites. They are widely used to generate electricity, control flooding, and irrigate agricultural lands. Due to recent urbanization trends, industrialization, and climatic changes, the construction of dams is in dire need, which is planning intensive, quite expensive, and time-consuming. Moreover, finding an appropriate site to construct dams is also considered a challenging task for decision-makers. The dam site selection problem (DSSP) has already been considered a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem under uncertain (fuzzy set) environments by several researchers. However, they ignored some essential evaluating features (e.g., (a) fuzzy parameterized grades, which assess the vague nature of parameters and sub-parameters, (b) the hypersoft setting, which provides multi-argument-based domains for the approximation of alternatives, (c) the complex setting which tackles the periodicity of data, and (d) the single-valued neutrosophic setting which facilitates the decision makers to provide their opinions in three-dimensional aspects) that can be used in DSSP to make it more reliable and trustworthy. Thus this study aims to employ a robust fuzzy parameterized algebraic approach which starts with the characterization of a novel structure "fuzzy parameterized single valued complex neutrosophic hypersoft set ($ \tilde{\lambda} $-set)" that is competent to deal with the above-mentioned features jointly. After that, it integrates the concept of fuzzy parameterization, decision-makers opinions in terms of single-valued complex neutrosophic numbers, and the classical matrix theory to compute the score values for evaluating alternatives. Based on the stages of the proposed approach, an algorithm is proposed, which is further explained by an illustrative example in which DSSP is considered a multiple attributes decision-making (MADM) scenario. The computed score values are then used to evaluate some suitable sites (regions) for dam construction. The computational results of the proposed algorithm are found to be precise and consistent through their comparison with some already developed approaches.

References

[1]	J. W. Wang, C. H. Cheng, K. C. Huang, Fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS for supplier selection, Appl. Soft Comput., 9 (2009), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2008.04.014 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2008.04.014
[2]	S. Q. Weng, G. H. Huang, Y. P. Li, An integrated scenario-based multi-criteria decision support system for water resources management and planning: a case study in the Haihe River Basin, Expert Syst. Appl., 37 (2010), 8242–8254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.061 doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.061
[3]	A. Noori, H. Bonakdari, K. Morovati, B. Gharabaghi, The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model, Environ. Syst. Decisions, 38 (2018), 471–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9673-x doi: 10.1007/s10669-018-9673-x
[4]	Z. L. Yang, M. W. Lin, Y. C. Li, W. Zhou, B. Xu, Assessment and selection of smart agriculture solutions using an information error-based Pythagorean fuzzy cloud algorithm, Int. J. Intell. Syst., 36 (2021), 6387–6418. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22554 doi: 10.1002/int.22554
[5]	M. W. Lin, Z. Y. Chen, R. Q. Chen, H. Fujita, Evaluation of startup companies using multicriteria decision making based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic information envelopment analysis models, Int. J. Intell. Syst., 36 (2021), 2292–2322. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22379 doi: 10.1002/int.22379
[6]	J. Deng, J. M. Zhan, Z. Sh. Xu, E. Herrera-Viedma, Regret-theoretic multiattribute decision-making model using three-way framework in multiscale information systems, IEEE Trans. Cybernetics, 2022, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCYB.2022.3173374 doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2022.3173374
[7]	H. B. Wang, F. Smarandache, Y. Q. Zhang, R. Sunderraman, Single valued neutrosophic sets, Tech. Sci. Appl. Math., 2010.
[8]	L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inf. Control, 8 (1965), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
[9]	K. T. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 20 (1986), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3 doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
[10]	B. C. Cuong, Picture fuzzy sets, J. Comput. Sci. Cybernetics, 30 (2014), 409–420. http://doi.org/10.15625/1813-9663/30/4/5032 doi: 10.15625/1813-9663/30/4/5032
[11]	F. Smarandache, Neutrosophy neutrosophic probability, set and logic: analytic synthesis synthetic analysis, American Research Press, 1998.
[12]	R. Şahin, A. Küçük, Subsethood measure for single valued neutrosophic sets, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 29 (2015), 525–530. http://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-141304 doi: 10.3233/IFS-141304
[13]	H. L. Huang, New distance measure of single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application, Int. J. Intell. Syst., 31 (2016), 1021–1032. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21815 doi: 10.1002/int.21815
[14]	S. Pramanik, S. Dalapati, S. Alam, F. Smarandache, T. K. Roy, NS-cross entropy-based MAGDM under single-valued neutrosophic set environment. Information, 9 (2018), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/info9020037 doi: 10.3390/info9020037
[15]	A. Aydoğdu, On similarity and entropy of single valued neutrosophic sets, Gen. math. notes, 29 (2015), 67–74.
[16]	P. Biswas, S. Pramanik, B. C. Giri, TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment, Neural comput. Appl., 27 (2016), 727–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1891-2 doi: 10.1007/s00521-015-1891-2
[17]	H. M. A. Farid, M. Riaz, Single-valued neutrosophic Einstein interactive aggregation operators with applications for material selection in engineering design: case study of cryogenic storage tank, Complex Intell. Syst., 8 (2022), 2131–2149.
[18]	J. Ling, M. W. Lin, L. L. Zhang, Medical waste treatment scheme selection based on single-valued neutrosophic numbers, AIMS Mathematics, 6 (2021), 10540–10564. https://doi.org/10.3934/math.2021612 doi: 10.3934/math.2021612
[19]	M. Ali, F. Smarandache, Complex neutrosophic set, Neural comput. Appl., 28 (2017), 1817–1834.
[20]	D. Ramot, R. Milo, M. Friedman, A. Kandel, Complex fuzzy sets, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 10 (2022), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1109/91.995119 doi: 10.1109/91.995119
[21]	A. Alkouri, A. R. Salleh, Complex intuitionistic fuzzy sets, In International conference on fundamental and applied sciences, 1482 (2012), 464–470. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4757515
[22]	D. Molodtsov, Soft set theory-first results, Comput. Math. Appl., 37 (1999), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(99)00056-5 doi: 10.1016/S0898-1221(99)00056-5
[23]	J. M. Zhan, J. C. R. Alcantud, A novel type of soft rough covering and its application to multicriteria group decision making, Artif. Intell. Rev., 52 (2019), 2381–2410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9617-3 doi: 10.1007/s10462-018-9617-3
[24]	C. Jana, M. Pal, A robust single-valued neutrosophic soft aggregation operators in multi-criteria decision making, Symmetry, 11 (2019), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11010110 doi: 10.3390/sym11010110
[25]	P. K. Maji, R. Biswas, A. R. Roy, Fuzzy soft sets, J. Fuzzy Math., 9 (2001), 589–602.
[26]	N. Çaǧman, S. Karataş, Intuitionistic fuzzy soft set theory and its decision making, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 24 (2013), 829–836. https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-2012-0601 doi: 10.3233/IFS-2012-0601
[27]	P. K. Maji, Neutrosophic soft set, Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform., 5 (2013), 157–168.
[28]	P. Thirunavukarasu, R. Suresh, V. Ashokkumar, Theory of complex fuzzy soft set and its applications, Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Technol., 3 (2017), 13–18.
[29]	T. Kumar, R. K. Bajaj, On complex intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets with distance measures and entropies, J. Math., 2014 (2014), 1–12. http://doi.org/10.1155/2014/972198 doi: 10.1155/2014/972198
[30]	S. Broumi, A. Bakali, F. Smarandache, M. Talea, M. Ali, G. Selvachandran, Complex neutrosophic soft set, In: 2017 FUZZ-IEEE Conference on Fuzzy Systems, 2017.
[31]	K. Y. Zhu, J. M. Zhan, Fuzzy parameterized fuzzy soft sets and decision making, Int. J. Machine Learn. Cyb., 7 (2016), 1207–1212.
[32]	E. Sulukan, N. Çağman, T. Aydin, Fuzzy parameterized intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets and their application to a performance-based value assignment problem, J. New Theory, 29 (2019), 79–88.
[33]	F. Smarandache, Extension of soft set of hypersoft set, and then to plithogenic hypersoft set, Neutrosophic Sets Syst., 22 (2018), 168–170.
[34]	A. U. Rahman, M. Saeed, F. Smarandache, M. R. Ahmad, Development of hybrids of hypersoft set with complex fuzzy set, complex intuitionistic fuzzy set and complex neutrosophic set, Neutrosophic Sets Syst., 38 (2020), 335–355.
[35]	A. U. Rahman, M. Saeed, S. S. Alodhaibi, H. A. E. W. Khalifa, Decision making algorithmic approaches based on parameterization of neutrosophic set under hypersoft set environment with fuzzy, intuitionistic fuzzy and neutrosophic settings, CMES Comput. Model. Eng. Sci., 128 (2021), 743–777. https://doi.org/10.32604/cmes.2021.016736 doi: 10.32604/cmes.2021.016736
[36]	A. U. Rahman, M. Saeed, A. Alburaikan, H. A. E. W. Khalifa, An intelligent multiattribute decision-support framework based on parameterization of neutrosophic hypersoft set, Comput. Intel. Neurosc., 2022, 6229947. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6229947 doi: 10.1155/2022/6229947
[37]	P. Rezaei, K. Rezaie, S. Nazari-Shirkouhi, M. R. J. Tajabadi, Application of fuzzy multi-criteria decision making analysis for evaluating and selecting the best location for construction of underground dam, Acta Polytech. Hung., 10 (2013), 187–205.
[38]	J. Chezgi, H. R. Pourghasemi, S. A. Naghibi, H. R. Moradi, M. K. Zarkesh, Assessment of a spatial multi-criteria evaluation to site selection underground dams in the Alborz Province, Iran, Geocarto Int., 31 (2016), 628–646. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2015.1073366 doi: 10.1080/10106049.2015.1073366
[39]	A. Dortaj, S. Maghsoudy, F. D. Ardejani, Z. Eskandari, A hybrid multi-criteria decision making method for site selection of subsurface dams in semi-arid region of Iran, Groundwater Sustain. Dev., 10 (2020), 100284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100284 doi: 10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100284
[40]	C. B. Karakuş, S. Yıldız, Gis-multi criteria decision analysis-based land suitability assessment for dam site selection, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 19 (2022), 12561–12580.
[41]	F. S. Chien, C. N. Wang, V. T Nguyen, V. T. Nguyen, K. Y. Chau, An evaluation model of quantitative and qualitative fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for hydroelectric plant location selection, Energies, 13 (2020), 2783. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13112783 doi: 10.3390/en13112783
[42]	V. Esavi, J. Karami, A. Alimohammadi, S. A. Niknezhad, Comparison the AHP and fuzzy-AHP decision making methods in underground dam site selection in Taleghan basin, Sci. Quart. J. Geosci., 22 (2012), 27–34.
[43]	S. Narayanamoorthy, V. Annapoorani, S. Kalaiselvan, D. Kang, Hybrid hesitant fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method: A symmetric analysis of the selection of the best water distribution system, Symmetry, 12 (2020), 2096. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12122096 doi: 10.3390/sym12122096
[44]	S. Janjua, I. Hassan, Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis applied to the Indus Reservoir system in Pakistan, Water Supply, 20 (2020), 1933–1949. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2020.103 doi: 10.2166/ws.2020.103
[45]	O. I. Adeyanju, A. A. Adedeji, Application of hybrid fuzzy-topsis for decision making in dam site selection, Int. J. Civ. Eng., 4 (2017), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V4I7P106 doi: 10.14445/23488352/IJCE-V4I7P106
[46]	M. Deveci, D. Pamucar, E. Oguz, Floating photovoltaic site selection using fuzzy rough numbers based LAAW and RAFSI model, Appl. Energy, 324 (2022), 119597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119597 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119597
[47]	S. H. R. Ahmadi, Y. Noorollahi, S. Ghanbari, M. Ebrahimi, H. Hosseini, A. Foroozani, et al., Hybrid fuzzy decision making approach for wind-powered pumped storage power plant site selection: a case study, Sustain. Energy Techn., 42 (2020), 100838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100838 doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2020.100838
[48]	M. Heidarimozaffar, M. Shahavand, Spatial zoning of Kabodarahang plain using fuzzy logic in geospatial information system for the construction of an underground dam, Geogr. Data., 30 (2021), 95–110.
[49]	S. S. Haghshenas, M. A. L. Neshaei, P. Pourkazem, S. S. Haghshenas, The risk assessment of dam construction projects using fuzzy TOPSIS (case study: Alavian Earth Dam), Civ. Eng. J., 2 (2016), 158–167. http://doi.org/10.28991/cej-2016-00000022 doi: 10.28991/cej-2016-00000022
[50]	A. Jozaghi, B. Alizadeh, M. Hatami, I. Flood, M. Khorrami, N. Khodaei, et al., A comparative study of the AHP and TOPSIS techniques for dam site selection using GIS: a case study of Sistan and Baluchestan Province, Iran, Geosciences, 8 (2018), 494. http://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201810.0773.v1 doi: 10.20944/preprints201810.0773.v1
[51]	F. Tufail, M. Shabir, E. S. A. Abo-Tabl, A comparison of Promethee and TOPSIS techniques based on bipolar soft covering-based rough sets, IEEE Access, 10 (2022), 37586–37602. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3161470 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3161470
[52]	M. Akram, G. Ali, M. A. Butt, J. C. R. Alcantud, Novel MCGDM analysis under $m$-polar fuzzy soft expert sets, Neural Comput. Appl., 33 (2021), 12051–12071.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)