一种基于模糊语言TOPSIS的应急决策方法

doi:10.7523/j.issn.2095-6134.2020.06.013

中国科学院大学学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (6): 814-819.DOI: 10.7523/j.issn.2095-6134.2020.06.013

一种基于模糊语言TOPSIS的应急决策方法

李海明¹, 虞钢^1,2,3, 田崇鑫^1,3, 尚国彬¹

1. 中国科学院大学工程科学学院, 北京 100049;
2. 中国科学院大学材料与光电研究中心, 北京 100049;
3. 中国科学院力学研究所, 北京 100190

收稿日期:2019-04-22 修回日期:2019-05-24 发布日期:2020-11-15
通讯作者: 虞钢
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金（11672304和11502269）资助

An emergency decision method based on fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS

LI Haiming¹, YU Gang^1,2,3, TIAN Chongxin^1,3, SHANG Guobin¹

1. School of Engineering Science, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
2. Materials and Photoelectric Research Center, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
3. Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China

Received:2019-04-22 Revised:2019-05-24 Published:2020-11-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 在应急决策过程中，决策信息通常具有犹豫性、模糊性和非对称性，且决策者呈现出直观、快速的语言决策偏好。提出一种基于模糊语言TOPSIS的应急决策方法，使用犹豫模糊语言术语集和二元语义表达式对高度不确定环境下的语言进行处理，提高对犹豫模糊语言信息的提取能力，生成易于理解的语言评估结果，从而辅助决策者进行快速、准确的决策判断。案例证实该方法的可行性与有效性，为解决应急决策问题提供了一种新方法。

关键词: 应急决策, 空中备降, 犹豫模糊语言集, 二元语义, 马氏距离TOPSIS法

Abstract: During the process of emergency decision-making, information is frequently hesitant, fuzzy, and unbalanced, and decision makers often present their intuitive and rapid linguistic decision preference. In this work, an emergency decision-making method based on fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS is proposed. It combines the hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set (HFLTS) and 2-tuple linguistic expression to deal with words in highly uncertain context, which not only improves the elicitation of hesitant fuzzy information but also leads to linguistic results easy to understand by decision makers, and it could be helpful to making a rapid and accurate decision judgement. A case study verifies the feasibility and effectiveness of this method and proves its certain practical value.

Key words: emergency decision, flight alternate, hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set, 2-tuple, Mahalanobis distance-based TOPSIS method

中图分类号:

TP399

李海明, 虞钢, 田崇鑫, 尚国彬. 一种基于模糊语言TOPSIS的应急决策方法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2020, 37(6): 814-819.

LI Haiming, YU Gang, TIAN Chongxin, SHANG Guobin. An emergency decision method based on fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS[J]. , 2020, 37(6): 814-819.

参考文献

[1] Zadeh L A. The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning[J]. Information Science, 1974, 8(3):199-249.
[2] Hao Z N, Xu Z S, Zhao H, et al. A dynamic weight determination approach based on the intuitionistic fuzzy Bayesian network and its application to emergency decision making[J]. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst, 2018, 26(4):1893-1907.
[3] Simonovic S P, Ahmad S. Computer-based model for flood evacuation emergency planning[J]. Natural Hazards, 2005, 34(1):25-51.
[4] Fu G. A fuzzy optimization method for multi-criteria decision making:an application to reservoir flood control operation[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2008, 34(1):145-149.
[5] Liang Y Y, Tu Y, Ju Y B, et al. A multi-granularity proportional hesitant fuzzy linguistic TODIM method and its application to emergency decision making[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019, 36(2019):101081.
[6] Vanderhaegen F. Erik Hollnagel:Safety-I and Safety-II, the past and future of safety management[J]. Cognition Technology & Work, 2015, 17(3):461-464.
[7] Plioutsias A, Karanikas N. Using STPA in the evaluation of fighter pilots training programs[J]. Procedia Engineering, 2015, 128:25-34.
[8] 吴立珍,李远,彭辉,等. 有人机/无人机协同任务指令集的设计与实现[J]. 系统仿真学报,2008(S1):514-517.
[9] Rodriguez R M, Martinez L, Herrera F. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2012, 20(1):109-119.
[10] Herrera F, Martinez L. A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2000, 8(6):746-752.
[11] Rodríguez Rosa M, Martínez L, Herrera F. A linguistic 2-tuple multicriteria decision making model dealing with hesitant linguistic information[C]//2015 IEEE International Confer-ence on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE). IEEE, 2015:1-7.
[12] Liu H, Rodríguez R M. A fuzzy envelope for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application to multicriteria decision making[J]. Information Sciences, 2014, 258:220-238.
[13] Martinez L, Herrera F. An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making:extensions, applications and challenges[J]. Information Sciences, 2012, 207:1-18.
[14] Yager R R. On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operations in multicriteria decision making[J]. IEEE Trans Systems Man Cybernet, 1988, 18(1):80-87.
[15] Herrera F, Martinez L, Sánchez P J. Managing non-homogeneous information in group decision making[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2005, 166(1):115-132.
[16] Suo M, Zhu B, Zhang Y, et al. Fuzzy Bayes risk based on Mahalanobis distance and Gaussian kernel for weight assignment in labeled multiple attribute decision making[J]. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2018, 152:26-39.
[17] 王岩韬,唐建勋,赵嶷飞. 基于机位可调整的航班空中备降优化[J]. 安全与环境学报,2018,18(2):636-639.
[18] Zavadsas E K, Mardani A, Turskis Z, et al. Development of TOPSIS method to solve complicated decision-making problems:an overview on developments from 2000 to 2015[J]. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 2016, 15(3):645-682.

一种基于模糊语言TOPSIS的应急决策方法

An emergency decision method based on fuzzy linguistic TOPSIS

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 8

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

访问统计

联系我们

[1]	连会强, 刘兵, 李朋远, 于华. 销量约束下基于切片递归神经网络模型的成品油价格推荐算法*[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 0, (): 61-62.
[2]	黄遵祥, 朱磊基, 熊勇. 一种基于双控节点的Ceph写性能优化方法^*[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 0, (): 102-102.
[3]	李朋远, 于华, 江成. 中文语境下基于事件关联挖掘的金融网络构建与分析[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2021, 38(2): 270-279.
[4]	王新栋, 于华, 江成. 社交网络关键节点检测的积极效应问题[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2019, 36(3): 425-432.
[5]	魏静, 王菊韵, 于华. 基于多模块贝叶斯网络的恐怖袭击威胁评估[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2015, 32(2): 264-272.
[6]	朱健鹏, 王颖, 杨诚. 基于Map/Reduce并行编程模型的XBRL维度数据解析算法[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2014, 31(1): 124-129.
[7]	刘礼农, 刘洪, 李幼铭. 波动方程三维叠前深度偏移并行计算的负载平衡方案[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2003, 20(3): 321-327.
[8]	张凯, 荆继武. CA系统在网络银行中的应用[J]. 中国科学院大学学报, 2001, 18(2): 173-176.