[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

A fuzzy approach for multi criteria decision making in diet plan ranking system using cuckoo optimization

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent days, people have easily adapted to unhealthy diets due to their busy lifestyles. Inappropriate and unhealthy food intake leads to various health problems. As a result of poor health and lack of information about a healthy diet, people depend on medicines rather than concentrating on improving their food intake. Due to the wide range of dietary advice, it is difficult to choose the appropriate diet plan that satisfies their personalized nutritional needs. The proposed system ranks the diet plan by considering personal information like age, gender, height, weight, pressure and heart rate. Various diet plans like intermittent fasting, plant-based diets, low-carb diets, paleo diet, low-fat diets, Mediterranean diet, DASH diet, vegan diet, gluten-free diet, GM diet and egg diet are considered. Multi-criteria decision-making methods such as fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS are also applied for the decision-making process to rank the best diet plan. Fuzzy AHP is used for weight generation, which is given to the cuckoo algorithm for optimization, and then, the fuzzy TOPSIS method helps in ranking the diet plan. Personal information is considered as criteria, and the diet plans are considered as alternatives for the decision-making process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Choi YS, Cho SH, Sei JM, Lee NH, Park WH, Song KE (1999) Effectiveness of nutrition counseling on dietary behavior and serum levels of lipids and antioxidant in patients with cardiovascular disease. KorJNutr 32(6):681–690

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lee MS (2004) Relationship of the relative risks of the me tabolicb syndrome and dietary habits of middle-aged in seoul. Korean J Comm Nutr 9(6):695–705

    Google Scholar 

  3. https://www.who.int/news-room/facts-in-pictures/detail/6-facts-on-obesity

  4. https://salud-america.org/unhealthy-eating-is-top-cause-of-us-death/

  5. https://www.statista.com/chart/17597/poor-diet-deaths-by-region/

  6. Resilience B (2017) The State of food security and nutrition in the world. Rome: building resilience for peace and food security

  7. Norouzi S, Kamel Ghalibaf A, Sistani S, Banazadeh V, Keykhaei F, Zareishargh P et al (2018) A mobile application for managing diabetic patients’ nutrition: a food recommender system. Arch Iran Med 21:466–472

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B (2011) Introduction to recommender systems handbook–recommender systems handbook, Springer

  9. Ge M, Elahi M, Fernaandez-Tobias I, Ricci F, Massimo D (2015) Using tags and latent factors in a food recommender system. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on digital health, 105–112, ACM

  10. Chen CH, Karvela M, Sohbati M, Shinawatra T, Toumazou C (2018) PERSON-personalized expert recommendation system for optimized nutrition. IEEE Trans Biomed Circ Syst 12(1):51–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yang T, Hung CC (2007) Multiple-attribute decision-making methods for plant layout design problem. Robotics and Computer-integrated manufacturing 23:126–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh, Turan Erman Erkan, “Selection of Academic Staff using the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP): a pilot study” -Technical Gazette 19, 923–929,2012.

  13. Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making—Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  14. Saaty TL (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw Hill Company, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Saaty TL (1988) Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chen CT (2000) Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 114:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. X.-S. Yang and S. Deb, “Cuckoo search via Lévy flights,” in Proceedings of the World Congress on Nature & Biologically Inspired Computing (NABIC '09), pp. 210–214, Coimbatore, India, December 2009.

  18. Imamura F, Micha R, Khatibzadeh S, Fahimi S, Shi P (2015) Powles, J and Mozaffarian, “Dietary quality among men and women in 187 countries in 1990 and 2010: A systematic assessment. Lancet Glob Health 3:e132–e142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jon Noronha, Eric Hysen, Haoqi Zhang, and Krzysztof Z Gajos, “Platemate: crowd sourcing nutritional analysis from food photographs”, In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium of User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’11). ACM, 1–12, 2011

  20. Mayumi Ueda, Syungo Asanuma, Yusuke Miyawaki, and Shinsuke Nakajima, “Recipe recommendation method by considering the users preference and ingredient quantity of target recipe”, In Proceedings of the International Multi Conference of Engineers and Computer Scientists, Vol. 1, 2014.

  21. Youri van Pinxteren, GijsGeleijnse, and Paul Kamsteeg, “Deriving a recipe similarity measure for recommending healthful meals”, In Proceedings of the 16th ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. 105–114, 2011.

  22. David Elsweiler and Morgan Harvey, “Towards automatic meal plan recommendations for balanced nutrition”, In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. ACM, 313– 316, 2015.

  23. Peter Forbes and Mu Zhu, “Content-boosted matrix factorization for recommender systems: experiments with recipe recommendation”, In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems. ACM, 261–264, 2011.

  24. Zipongo Personalizing food recommendations with data science. Retrieved from hhttp://blog.zipongo.com/blog/2015/8/11/personalizing-food-recommendations-with-data-science

  25. Celis-Morales C, Livingstone KM, Marsaux CFM, et al., “Design and baseline characteristics of the Food4Me study: a web-based randomised controlled trial of personalised nutrition in seven European countries” Genes & Nutrition, 2015.

  26. http://www.hidoc.co.kr/HealthPedia

  27. Acampora G, Loia V, Lee CS, Wang MH (2013) On the power of fuzzy markup language. Springe, Berlin, Germany

    Book  Google Scholar 

  28. Bouchachia A, Vanaret C (2014) GT2FC: an online growing interval type2 self-learning fuzzy classifier. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22(4):999–1018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Castillo O, Melin P (2012) A review on the design and optimization of interval type-2 fuzzy controllers. Appl Soft Comput 12(4):1267–1278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Castillo O, Melin P, Garza AA, Montiel O, Sepulveda R (2011) Optimization of interval type-2 fuzzy logic controllers using evolutionary algorithms. Soft Comput 15(6):1145–1160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sikkandar H, Thiyagarajan R (2021) Deep learning based facial expression recognition using improved Cat Swarm Optimization. J Ambient Intell Human Comput 12:3037–3053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-020-02463-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Subbaraj S, Thiyagarajan R, Rengaraj M (2021) A smart fog computing based real-time secure resource allocation and scheduling strategy using multi-objective crow search algorithm. J Ambient Intell Human Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-021-03354-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sikkandar H, Thiyagarajan R (2020) Soft biometrics-based face image retrieval using improved grey wolf optimisation. IET Image Process 14:451–461. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-ipr.2019.0271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Subbaraj S, Thiagarajan R, Rengaraj M (2020) Multi-objective league championship algorithm for real-time task scheduling. Neural Comput & Applic 32:5093–5104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3950-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Haseena S, Blessa Binolin Pepsi M, Saroja S (2020) Multi criteria decision making technique for machine learning algorithms: iterative and noniterative algorithms, Int J Sci Technol Res 9(1):2392- 2403, ISSN 2277-8616

  36. Yager RR (2003) Fuzzy logic methods in recommender systems. Fuzzy Sets Syst 136(2):133–149

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Zenebe A, Norcio AF (2009) Representation, similarity measures and aggregation methods using fuzzy sets for content-based recommender systems. Fuzzy Sets Syst 160(1):76–94

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Guerrero JS, Viedma EH, Olivas JA, Cerezo A, Romero FP (2011) A google wave-based fuzzy recommender system to disseminate information in University Digital Libraries 2.0. Inform Sci 181(9):1503–1516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jannach D, Zanker M, Ge M, Groning M (2012) Recommender systems in computer science and information systems—a landscape of research. E-commerce and web technologies. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 76–87

    Google Scholar 

  40. Terveen L, Hill W (2001) Beyond recommender systems: helping people help each other, In: Human-computer interaction in the new millennium, J Carroll, ED. Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley, pp 487–509

  41. Ekstrand MD, Riedl JT, Konstan JA (2011) Collaborative filtering recommender systems. Found Trends Human-Comput Interact 4(2):81–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pazzani, M.J., Muramatsu, J., & Billsus, D.. “Syskill and webert: Identifying interesting web sites”, In Clancey, W.J., & Weld, D.S. (Eds.) AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1, AAAI Press / The MIT Press (pp. 54–61), 1996.

  43. Revathi T., and Saroja S., Haseena S., and Blessa Binolin Pepsi M. "Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques for Histopathological Image Classification." In Histopathological Image Analysis in Medical Decision Making. edited by Dey, Nilanjan and Amira S. Ashour, Harihar Kalia, R.T. Goswami, and Himansu Das, 103–138. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6316-7.ch005

  44. A. S. K. Kannan, S. A. a. Balamurugan and S. Sasikala, "A Novel Software Package Selection Method Using Teaching–Learning Based Optimization and Multiple Criteria Decision Making," in IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 941–954, Aug. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2019.2918050

  45. Wang L, Rodriguez RM, Wang YM (2017) A dynamic multi-attribute group emergency decision making method considering experts’ hesitation. Int J Comput Intell Syst 11:163–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Y. C. Chou, H. Y. Yen, C. C. Sun and J. S. Hon, “Comparison of AHP and fuzzy AHP methods for human resources in science technology (HRST) performance index selection”, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 2013, pp. 792–796, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2013.6962520.

  47. M. V. Carvalho Fagundes, Á. Cheles Keler, E. Oliveira Teles, S. A. B. Vieira de Melo and F. G. Mendonça Freires, “Multicriteria Decision-Making System for Supplier Selection Considering Risk: A Computational Fuzzy AHP-Based Approach”, in IEEE Latin America Transactions, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 1564–1572, Sept. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TLA.2021.9468610.

  48. Behzadian M, Kazemzadeh RB, Albadvi A, Aghdasi M (2010) ‘PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 200(1):198–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Melvin, Alexander. “Decision-making using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and SAS/IML.”, SESUG, Paper SD-04 (2012).

  50. Mamat, Nur Jumaadzan Zaleha, and Jacob Karikottu Daniel, “Statistical analyses on time complexity and rank consistency between singular value decomposition and the duality approach in AHP: A case study of faculty member selection”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling,1099–1106, 2007

  51. Balenzetis, T, Chen, X.; Galnaityte, A, Namiotko, V, “Optimizing crop mix with respect to economic and environmental constraints: An integrated MCDM approach”, Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 705, 135896.

  52. Juying Q, Fanyong M, Xuelan Z (2007) A New Method for Triangular Fuzzy Number Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Chinese Control Conference 2007:408–411. https://doi.org/10.1109/CHICC.2006.4347308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kilincci O, Onal SA (2011) Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company. Expert Syst Appl 38(8):9656–9664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Khajeh M, Golzary A (2014) R, “Synthesis of zinc oxide nano particles–chitosan for extraction of methyl orange from water samples: Cuckoo optimization algorithm–artificial neural network.” Spectrochimica Acta Part A 131:189–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Khajeh, M., &Jahanbin, E, “Application of cuckoo optimization algorithm–artificial neural network method of zinc oxide nanoparticles–chitosan for extraction of uranium from watersamples”, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 135, 70–75, 2014.

  56. Mellal MA, Williams EJ (2015) Cuckoo optimization algorithm for unit production cost in multi-pass turning operations. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 76(1–4):647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Mellal MA, Williams E (2015) J, “Cuckoo optimization algorithm with penalty function for combined heat and power economic dispatch problem.” Energy 93:1711–1718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Rajabioun R (2011) Cuckoo optimization algorithm Elsevier 11(8):5508–5518

    Google Scholar 

  59. Shadkam E, Bijari M Evaluation the efficiency of cuckoo optimization algorithm Int J Comput Sci Appl (IJCSA) 4:39–47

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Technology, Mepco Schlenk Engineering College (Autonomous), Sivakasi, Tamilnadu, India

    S. Haseena, S. Saroja & T. Revathi

Authors
  1. S. Haseena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Saroja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Revathi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Haseena.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. S. Haseena and Dr. S. Saroja declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haseena, S., Saroja, S. & Revathi, T. A fuzzy approach for multi criteria decision making in diet plan ranking system using cuckoo optimization. Neural Comput & Applic 34, 13625–13638 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07163-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07163-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation