[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

An intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert set-based robust decision-support framework for human resource management integrated with modified TOPSIS and correlation coefficient

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

Abstract

Human resource management is the process of making a company’s human resources decisions. In general, these decisions include hiring, firing, training, and developing people according to their positions and the needs of the organization. It includes a variety of policies and strategies designed to recognize the contribution that people make to an organization. The core goal of this article is to depict a novel fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology for selecting employees. The purpose behind selecting employees is to identify and hire individuals who possess the required skills, qualifications, and attributes that align with the organization’s goals and job requirements. To reflect an inadequate assessment, ambiguity, and anxiety in making choices, the intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert set is an extension of the intuitionistic fuzzy soft expert and hypersoft sets. It is a novel approach to decisions and intelligent computing in the face of uncertainty. The intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert set has a better ability to handle ambiguous and unclear data. In the research that follows, the ideas and characteristics of the correlation coefficient and the weighted correlation coefficient of the intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert sets are proposed. Under the aegis of intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert sets, a TOPSIS based on correlation coefficients and weighted correlation coefficients is introduced. Aside from that, we also covered aggregation operators, including intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft weighted geometric operators. The decision-making process is suggested in an intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert environment to resolve uncertain and ambiguous information, relying on the well-established TOPSIS approach and aggregation operators. An illustration of decision-making challenges shows how the suggested algorithm can be used. The efficacy of this strategy is lastly demonstrated by comparing its benefits, effectiveness, flexibility, and numerous current studies.

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.

Data availability

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

  1. Fan W, Yang L, Bouguila N (2021) Unsupervised grouped axial data modeling via hierarchical Bayesian nonparametric models with Watson distributions. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 44(12):9654–9668

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tian J, Hou M, Bian H, Li J (2022) Variable surrogate model-based particle swarm optimization for high-dimensional expensive problems. Complex Intell Syst 1–49

  3. Xie, X., Huang, L, Marson, S M, Wei, G (2023) Emergency response process for sudden rainstorm and flooding: scenario deduction and Bayesian network analysis using evidence theory and knowledge meta-theory. Nat Hazards 1–23

  4. Luo R, Peng Z, Hu J (2023) On model identification based optimal control and it’s applications to multi-agent learning and control. Mathematics 11(4):906

    Google Scholar 

  5. Guo Q, Zhong J (2022) The effect of urban innovation performance of smart city construction policies: evaluate by using a multiple period difference-in-differences model. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 184:122003

    Google Scholar 

  6. Li X, Sun Y (2020) Stock intelligent investment strategy based on support vector machine parameter optimization algorithm. Neural Comput Appl 32:1765–1775

    Google Scholar 

  7. Song X, Tong W, Lei C, Huang J, Fan X, Zhai G, Zhou H (2021) A clinical decision model based on machine learning for ptosis. BMC Ophthalmol 21:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  8. Li Li Y, Hoque MA, Xia T, Tarkoma S, Hui P (2020) To what extent we repeat ourselves? Discovering daily activity patterns across mobile app usage. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 21(4):1492–1507

    Google Scholar 

  9. Luo R, Peng Z, Hu J (2023) On model identification based optimal control and it’s applications to multi-agent learning and control. Mathematics 11(4):906

    Google Scholar 

  10. Li D, Ge SS, Lee TH (2020) Fixed-time-synchronized consensus control of multiagent systems. IEEE Trans Control Netw Syst 8(1):89–98

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Tutar H, Nam S, GüLer S (2023) Development of sustainable human resources in the period 2000–2021: a bibliometric review. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 14(1):117–139

    Google Scholar 

  12. Li Z, Zhou X, Huang S (2021) Managing skill certification in online outsourcing platforms: a perspective of buyer-determined reverse auctions. Int J Prod Econ 238:108166

    Google Scholar 

  13. Paauwe J, Boselie P (2005) HRM and performance: What next? Hum Resour Manag J 15(4):68–83

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Kildienė S (2014) State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technol Econ Dev Econ 20(1):165–179

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rahat G, Hazan RY (2001) Candidate selection methods: an analytical framework. Party Polit 7(3):297–322

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zanakis SH, Solomon A, Wishart N, Dublish S (1988) Multi-attribute decision making: a simulation comparison of select methods. Eur J Oper Res 107(3):507–529

    Google Scholar 

  17. Nâdâban S, Dzitac S, Dzitac I (2016) Fuzzy TOPSIS: a general view. Procedia Comput Sci 91:823–831

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353

    Google Scholar 

  19. Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Deli İ, Keleş MA (2021) Distance measures on trapezoidal fuzzy multi-numbers and application to multi-criteria decision-making problems. Soft Comput 25:5979–5992

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mahmood T, Ullah K, Khan Q, Jan N (2019) An approach toward decision-making and medical diagnosis problems using the concept of spherical fuzzy sets. Neural Comput Appl 31:7041–7053

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ünver M, Olgun M, Türkarslan E (2022) Cosine and cotangent similarity measures based on Choquet integral for spherical fuzzy sets and applications to pattern recognition. J Comput Cogn Eng 1(1):21–31

    Google Scholar 

  23. Wang L, Garg H (2021) Algorithm for multiple attribute decision-making with interactive Archimedean norm operations under Pythagorean fuzzy uncertainty. Int J Comput Intell Syst 14(1):503–527

    Google Scholar 

  24. Peng X, Garg H (2022) Intuitionistic fuzzy soft decision making method based on CoCoSo and CRITIC for CCN cache placement strategy selection. Artif Intell Rev 55(2):1567–1604

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smarandache F (1998) Neutrosophy, neutrosophic probability set, and logic. In: Analytic synthesis and synthetic analysis. American Research Press, Santa Fe

  26. Molodtsov D (1999) Soft set theory-first results. Comput Math Appl 37(4–5):19–31

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Rahman AU, Saeed M, Ihsan M, Arshad M, Ayaz S (2021) A conceptual framework of m-convex and mconcave sets under soft set environment with properties. Trans Math Comput Sci 1(1):40–60

    Google Scholar 

  28. Maji PK, Roy AR, Biswas R (2001) Fuzzy soft sets. J Fuzzy Math 9:589–602

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Rahman AU, Saeed M, Arshad M, Ihsan M, Ahmad MR (2021) (m; n)-convexity-cum-concavity on fuzzy soft set with applications in first and second sense. Punjab Univ J Math 53(1):19–33

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  30. Roy AR, Maji PK (2007) A fuzzy soft set theoretic approach to decision making problems. J Comput Appl Math 203(2):412–418

    Google Scholar 

  31. Adam F, Hassan N (2014) Q-fuzzy soft set. Appl Math Sci 8(174):8689–8695

    Google Scholar 

  32. Adam F, Hassan N (2014) Operations on Q-fuzzy soft set. Appl Math Sci 8(175):8697–8701

    Google Scholar 

  33. Basu TM, Mahapatra NK, Mondal SK (2012) A balanced solution of a fuzzy soft set based decision making problem in medical science. Appl Soft Comput 12(10):3260–3275

    Google Scholar 

  34. Maji PK, Biswas R, Roy AR (2001) Intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets. J Fuzzy Math 9(3):677–692

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Alkhazaleh S, Salleh AR (2011) Soft expert sets. Adv Decis Sci 757868-1

  36. Alkhazaleh S, Salleh AR (2014) Fuzzy soft expert set and its application. Appl Math 5:1349–1368

    Google Scholar 

  37. Broumi S, Smarandache F (2015) Intuitionistic fuzzy soft expert sets and its application in decision making. J New Theory 1:89–105

    Google Scholar 

  38. Smarandache F (2018) Extension of soft set to hypersoft set and then to plithogenic hypersoft set. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 22:168–170

    Google Scholar 

  39. Saeed M, Ahsan M, Siddique MK, Ahmad AR (2020) A study of the fundamentals of hypersoft set theory. Int J Sci Eng Res 1(11):320–329

    Google Scholar 

  40. Saeed M, Rahman AU, Ahsan M, Smarandache F (2021) An inclusive study on fundamentals of hypersoft set. In: Theory and application of hypersoft set. Pons Publishing House, Brussel, pp 1–23

  41. Rahman AU, Saeed M, Smarandache F, Ahmad MA (2020) Development of hybrids of hypersoft set with complex fuzzy set, complex intuitionistic fuzzy set and complex neutrosophic set. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 38:335–354

    Google Scholar 

  42. Rahman AU, Hafeez A, Saeed M, Ahmad, MA Farwa U (2021) Development of rough hypersoft set with application in decision making for the best choice of chemical material. In: Theory and application of hypersoft set. Pons Publication House, Brussel, pp 192–202

  43. Rahman AU, Saeed M, Dhital A (2021) Decision making application based on neutrosophic parameterized hypersoft set theory. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 41:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  44. Saeed M, Ahsan M, Rahman AU (2021) A novel approach to mappings on hypersoft classes with application. In: Theory and application of hypersoft set. Pons Publication House, Brussel, pp 175–191

  45. Yolcu A, Özturk TY (2021) Fuzzy hypersoft sets and its application to decision-making. In: Theory and application of hypersoft set. Pons Publishing House, Brussel, pp 50–64

  46. Yolcu A, Smarandache F, Özturk TY (2021) Intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft sets. Commun Fac Sci Univ Ankara Ser A1 Math Stat 70(1):443–455

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  47. Saqlain M, Jafar N, Moin S, Saeed M, Broumi S (2020) Single and multi-valued neutrosophic hypersoft set and tangent similarity measure of single valued neutrosophic hypersoft sets. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 32:317–329

    Google Scholar 

  48. Saqlain M, Moin S, Jafar MN, Saeed M, Smarandache F (2020) Aggregate operators of neutrosophic hypersoft sets. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 32:294–306

    Google Scholar 

  49. Saqlain M, Saeed M, Ahmad MR, Smarandache F (2019) Generalization of TOPSIS for neutrosophic hypersoft sets using accuracy function and its application. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 27:131–137

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ihsan M, Rahman AU, Saeed M (2021) Hypersoft expert set with application in decision making for recruitment process. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 42:191–207

    Google Scholar 

  51. Ihsan M, Saeed M, Rahman AU, Smarandache F (2022) An inclusive study on fundamentals of hypersoft expert set with application. Punjab Univ J Math 54(5):315–332

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  52. Ihsan M, Rahman AU, Saeed M (2021) Fuzzy hypersoft expert set with application in decision making for the best selection of product. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 46:318–335

    Google Scholar 

  53. Chiang DA, Lin NP (1999) Correlation of fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 102(2):221–226

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  54. Gerstenkorn T, Mańko J (1991) Correlation of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 44(1):39–43

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  55. Zeng W, Li H (2007) Correlation coefficient of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. J Ind Eng Int 3(5):33–40

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kumar K, Garg H (2018) Connection number of set pair analysis based TOPSIS method on intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their application to decision making. Appl Intell 48:2112–2119

    Google Scholar 

  57. Wan SP, Wang F, Dong JY (2016) A novel risk attitudinal ranking method for intuitionistic fuzzy values and application to MADM. Appl Soft Comput 40:98–112

    Google Scholar 

  58. Luo L, Ren H (2016) A new similarity measure of intuitionistic fuzzy set and application in MADM problem. AMSE Ser Adv A 59:204–223

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hanafy IM, Salama AA, Mahfouz M (2013) Correlation coefficients of neutrosophic sets by centroid method. Int J Probab Stat 2(1):9–12

    Google Scholar 

  60. Ye J (2017) Multiple attribute decision-making method using correlation coefficients of normal neutrosophic sets. Symmetry 9(6):80

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wu H, Yuan Y, Wei L, Pei L (2018) On entropy, similarity measure and cross-entropy of single-valued neutrosophic sets and their application in multi-attribute decision making. Soft Comput 22:7367–7376

    Google Scholar 

  62. Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2016) TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput Appl 27:727–737

    Google Scholar 

  63. Chang KH (2015) A novel general risk assessment method using the soft TOPSIS approach. J Ind Prod Eng 32(6):408–421

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sharma S, Singh S (2019) On some generalized correlation coefficients of the fuzzy sets and fuzzy soft sets with application in cleanliness ranking of public health centres. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 36(4):3671–3683

    Google Scholar 

  65. Arora R, Garg H (2018) A robust correlation coefficient measure of dual hesitant fuzzy soft sets and their application in decision making. Eng Appl Artif Intell 72:80–92

    Google Scholar 

  66. Garg H, Arora R (2020) TOPSIS method based on correlation coefficient for solving decision-making problems with intuitionistic fuzzy soft set information. AIMS Math 5(4):2944–2966

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  67. Zulqarnain RM, Xin XL, Saeed M (2020) Extension of TOPSIS method under intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft environment based on correlation coefficient and aggregation operators to solve decision making problem. AIMS Math 6(3):2732–2755

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  68. Hwang CL, Yoon K (1981) Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, pp 58–191

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Management and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan

    Muhammad Ihsan, Muhammad Saeed & Atiqe Ur Rahman

Authors
  1. Muhammad Ihsan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammad Saeed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Atiqe Ur Rahman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Saeed.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors 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

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ihsan, M., Saeed, M. & Rahman, A.U. An intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft expert set-based robust decision-support framework for human resource management integrated with modified TOPSIS and correlation coefficient. Neural Comput & Applic 36, 1123–1147 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-09085-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-09085-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation