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

Two improved N-two-stage K-means clustering aggregation algorithmic paradigms for HFLTS possibility distributions

Published: 01 December 2023 Publication History

Abstract

The available method based on statistical principles for aggregating hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set (HFLTS) possibility distribution is the N-two-stage algorithmic aggregation paradigm driven by the K-means clustering (N2S-KMC). Nonetheless, the N2S-KMC method is subject to two significant limitations. (i) The grouping technique is capable of effectively partitioning decision-making information into N groups. However, it does not determine the appropriate placement of members within each group, as the number of computations is dependent on the number of elements present in each group, rather than the elements themselves. (ii) The initial clustering centers of K-means clustering are chosen without adhering to the distribution law within the aggregated hesitant 2-tuple linguistic terms set (H2TLTS) possibility distribution. This may result in a reduction in the clustering performance. In order to address the aforementioned limitations, we suggest two enhancement techniques for the former. Firstly, we propose the utilization of the minimum average difference (MAD) method to ascertain the number of groups. This approach aims to reduce the time required for the initial stage of aggregation following grouping. Secondly, we recommend the implementation of the maximize compactness degree of inter-group grouping (MCDIGG) method. This method enables the identification of group members, resulting in a more concentrated distribution of data subsequent to grouping. The present study suggests the utilization of MAD and MCDIGG techniques as a substitute for the grouping approach in the N2S-KMC model. This leads to the development of a new algorithm, IN2S-DO-KMC, wherein the data is partitioned into K subsets in a descending order to determine the initial center for KMC. Furthermore, with respect to the issue present in the subsequent phase, we propose the utilization of the density canopy (DC) algorithm to perform pre-clustering of the data and produce the initial clustering center and the quantity of clusters for the K-means algorithm. Subsequently, a refined version of the N2S-KMC model, denoted as IN2S-DC-KMC, has been suggested. Ultimately, an empirical study is conducted to assess the validity and practicability of the proposed framework for evaluating failure modes in medical devices. The outcomes are evaluated with regards to the efficacy of the algorithm, the numerical dispersion, and the pragmatic ramifications.

Highlights

We propose the MAD method that determines the number of groups for the aggregated HFLTS possibility distributions.
We propose the MCDIGG method that determines member of each group with HFLTS possibility distributions.
We apply an improved density canopy clustering algorithm to the K-means clustering algorithm for pre-clustering process.
We propose a measure to predict the degree of compactness after data aggregated in different grouping cases.
We propose two aggregation algorithms, IN2S-DO-KMC and IN2S-DC-KMC, for HFLTS possibility distributions.

References

[1]
Triantaphyllou E., Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods, Springer, 2000.
[2]
Lu J., Ruan D., Multi-Objective Group Decision Making: Methods, Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques, Imperial College Press, 2007.
[3]
Dong Y., Zha Q., Zhang H., Herrera F., Consensus reaching and strategic manipulation in group decision making with trust relationships, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems 51 (10) (2021) 6304–6318.
[4]
Roubens M., Fuzzy sets and decision analysis, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 90 (2) (1997) 199–206.
[5]
Chen Z.-S., Martínez L., Chin K.-S., Tsui K.-L., Two-stage aggregation paradigm for HFLTS possibility distributions: A hierarchical clustering perspective, Expert Syst. Appl. 104 (2018) 43–66.
[6]
Chen Z.-S., Zhang X., Pedrycz W., Wang X.-J., Chin K.-S., Martínez L., K-means clustering for the aggregation of HFLTS possibility distributions: N-two-stage algorithmic paradigm, Knowl.-Based Syst. 227 (2021).
[7]
Zadeh L.A., Fuzzy logic=computing with words, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 4 (2) (1996) 103.
[8]
Romero Á.L., Rodríguez R.M., Martínez L., Computing with comparative linguistic expressions and symbolic translation for decision making: ELICIT information, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 28 (10) (2019) 2510–2522.
[9]
Zhang S., Xu Z., He Y., Operations and integrations of probabilistic hesitant fuzzy information in decision making, Inf. Fusion 38 (2017) 1–11.
[10]
Bonissone P.P., Decker K.S., Selecting uncertainty calculi and granularity: An experiment in trading-off precision and complexity, in: Machine Intelligence and Pattern Recognition, Vol. 4, Elsevier, 1986, pp. 217–247.
[11]
Degani R., Bortolan G., The problem of linguistic approximation in clinical decision making, Internat. J. Approx. Reason. 2 (2) (1988) 143–162.
[12]
Martínez L., Liu J., Yang J.-B., A fuzzy model for design evaluation based on multiple criteria analysis in engineering systems, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 14 (03) (2006) 317–336.
[13]
Yager R.R., On the retranslation process in Zadeh’s paradigm of computing with words, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B 34 (2) (2004) 1184–1195.
[14]
Dubois D.J., Fuzzy Sets and Systems: Theory and Applications, Vol. 144, Academic Press, 1980.
[15]
Delgado M., Verdegay J.L., Vila M.A., On aggregation operations of linguistic labels, Int. J. Intell. Syst. 8 (3) (1993) 351–370.
[16]
Herrera F., Herrera-Viedma E., Verdegay J.L., Direct approach processes in group decision making using linguistic OWA operators, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 79 (2) (1996) 175–190.
[17]
Herrera F., Martínez L., A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 8 (6) (2000) 746–752.
[18]
Chen Z.-S., Zhang X., Rodríguez R.M., Pedrycz W., Martínez L., Skibniewski M.J., Expertise-structure and risk-appetite-integrated two-tiered collective opinion generation framework for large-scale group decision making, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 30 (12) (2022) 5496–5510.
[19]
Xu Z., A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations, Inf. Sci. 166 (1–4) (2004) 19–30.
[20]
Wang J.-H., Hao J., A new version of 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 14 (3) (2006) 435–445.
[21]
Rodríguez R.M., Martínez L., Herrera F., Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 20 (1) (2011) 109–119.
[22]
Xu Z., Uncertain linguistic aggregation operators based approach to multiple attribute group decision making under uncertain linguistic environment, Inf. Sci. 168 (1–4) (2004) 171–184.
[23]
Wang H., Extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their aggregation in group decision making, Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 8 (1) (2015) 14–33.
[24]
Liu Y., Rodríguez R.M., Qin J., Martínez L., Type-2 fuzzy envelope of extended hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set: Application to multi-criteria group decision making, Comput. Ind. Eng. (2022).
[25]
Chen Z.-S., Chin K.-S., Martínez L., Tsui K.-L., Customizing semantics for individuals with attitudinal HFLTS possibility distributions, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26 (6) (2018) 3452–3466.
[26]
Liu P., Zhang X., Pedrycz W., A consensus model for hesitant fuzzy linguistic group decision-making in the framework of Dempster–Shafer evidence theory, Knowl.-Based Syst. 212 (2021).
[27]
Xu H., Liu P., Teng F., Two prospect theory-based decision-making models using data envelopment analysis with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information, Inform. Sci. 582 (2022) 415–438.
[28]
Wang Z., Wang Y., Prospect theory-based group decision-making with stochastic uncertainty and 2-tuple aspirations under linguistic assessments, Inf. Fusion 56 (2020) 81–92.
[29]
Wu G., Zhang W., Wu Z., Local minimum adjustment for the consensus model with distribution linguistic preference relations considering preference reliability, Inf. Fusion 93 (2023) 21–35.
[30]
Zhou M., Zheng Y.-Q., Chen Y.-W., Cheng B.-Y., Herrera-Viedma E., Wu J., A large-scale group consensus reaching approach considering self-confidence with two-tuple linguistic trust/distrust relationship and its application in life cycle sustainability assessment, Inf. Fusion 94 (2023) 181–199.
[31]
Zhang Z., Gao J., Gao Y., Yu W., Two-sided matching decision making with multi-granular hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and incomplete criteria weight information, Expert Syst. Appl. 168 (2021).
[32]
Zhou T., Chen Z., Ming X., Multi-criteria evaluation of smart product-service design concept under hesitant fuzzy linguistic environment: A novel cloud envelopment analysis approach, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 115 (2022).
[33]
Zheng C., Zhou Y., Zhou L., Chen H., Clustering and compatibility-based approach for large-scale group decision making with hesitant fuzzy linguistic preference relations: An application in e-waste recycling, Expert Syst. Appl. 197 (2022).
[34]
Sonia H., Nesrin H., Habib C., An implementation of the hesitant fuzzy linguistic ordered interaction distance operators in a multi attribute group decision making problem, in: 2020 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Electronics, Control, Optimization and Computer Science, ICECOCS, IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–4.
[35]
Liao H., Gou X., Xu Z., Zeng X.-J., Herrera F., Hesitancy degree-based correlation measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their applications in multiple criteria decision making, Inform. Sci. 508 (2020) 275–292.
[36]
Seth T., Muhuri P.K., Type-2 fuzzy set based hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for linguistic decision making, 2020, arXiv:2002.11714.
[37]
Wu Z., Xu J., Possibility distribution-based approach for MAGDM with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information, IEEE Trans. Cybern. 46 (3) (2015) 694–705.
[38]
Wang Y., Ma J., Gao N., Wen Q., Sun L., Guo H., Federated fuzzy k-means for privacy-preserving behavior analysis in smart grids, Appl. Energy 331 (2023).
[39]
Tran T.-N., Nguyen T.-L., Hoang V.T., Voznak M., Sensor clustering using a K-means algorithm in combination with optimized unmanned aerial vehicle trajectory in wireless sensor networks, Sensors 23 (4) (2023) 2345.
[40]
Ye W., Zhang R., Yang Q., A consistency evaluation method of pavement performance based on K-means clustering and cumulative distribution, Appl. Sci. 13 (1) (2023) 106.
[41]
Hu H., Liu J., Zhang X., Fang M., An effective and adaptable K-means algorithm for cluster analysis, Pattern Recognit. (2023).
[42]
Froese R., Klassen J.W., Leung C.K., Loewen T.S., The border k-means clustering algorithm for one dimensional data, in: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BigComp), IEEE, 2022, pp. 35–42.
[43]
Wang C.-L., Chan Y.-K., Chu S.-W., Yu S.-S., r-reference points based k-means algorithm, Inform. Sci. 610 (2022) 204–214.
[44]
Zhang G., Zhang C., Zhang H., Improved K-means algorithm based on density Canopy, Knowl.-Based Syst. 145 (2018) 289–297.
[45]
Zadeh L.A., The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I, Inform. Sci. 8 (3) (1975) 199–249.
[46]
Wei C., Liao H., A multigranularity linguistic group decision-making method based on hesitant 2-tuple sets, Int. J. Intell. Syst. 31 (6) (2016) 612–634.
[47]
Xiong S.-H., Chen Z.-S., Chiclana F., Chin K.-S., Skibniewski M.J., Proportional hesitant 2-tuple linguistic distance measurements and extended VIKOR method: Case study of evaluation and selection of green airport plans, Int. J. Intell. Syst. 37 (7) (2022) 4113–4162.
[48]
Liu H.-C., You J.-X., Li P., Su Q., Failure mode and effect analysis under uncertainty: An integrated multiple criteria decision making approach, IEEE Trans. Reliab. 65 (3) (2016) 1380–1392.
[49]
Anjalee J.L., Rutter V., Samaranayake N., Application of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to improve medication safety in the dispensing process–a study at a teaching hospital, Sri Lanka, BMC Public Health 21 (1) (2021) 1–13.
[50]
Ilbahar E., Kahraman C., Cebi S., Risk assessment of renewable energy investments: A modified failure mode and effect analysis based on prospect theory and intuitionistic fuzzy AHP, Energy 239 (2022).
[51]
Zhu J.-H., Chen Z.-S., Shuai B., Pedrycz W., Chin K.-S., Martínez L., Failure mode and effect analysis: a three-way decision approach, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 106 (2021).
[52]
Sarkar D., Singh M., Risk analysis by integrated fuzzy expected value method and fuzzy failure mode and effect analysis for an elevated metro rail project of Ahmedabad, India, Int. J. Constr. Manage. 22 (10) (2022) 1818–1829.
[53]
Chen Z.-S., Chen J.-Y., Chen Y.-H., Yang Y., Jin L., Herrera-Viedma E., Pedrycz W., Large-group failure mode and effects analysis for risk management of angle grinders in the construction industry, Inf. Fusion 97 (2023).
[54]
Liu H.-C., Li P., You J.-X., Chen Y.-Z., A novel approach for FMEA: combination of interval 2-tuple linguistic variables and gray relational analysis, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 31 (5) (2015) 761–772.
[55]
García-Zamora D., Labella Á., Ding W., Rodríguez R.M., Martínez L., Large-scale group decision making: A systematic review and a critical analysis, IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin. 9 (6) (2022) 949–966.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Large group decision-making with a rough integrated asymmetric cloud model under multi-granularity linguistic environmentInformation Sciences: an International Journal10.1016/j.ins.2024.120994678:COnline publication date: 1-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Campus Information Visualization Management and Design Using the K-means Data Analysis MethodProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Information Education and Artificial Intelligence10.1145/3660043.3660086(241-246)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Information Fusion
Information Fusion  Volume 100, Issue C
Dec 2023
963 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 December 2023

Author Tags

  1. Computing with words
  2. Aggregation paradigm
  3. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets
  4. K-means clustering
  5. Information fusion

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Large group decision-making with a rough integrated asymmetric cloud model under multi-granularity linguistic environmentInformation Sciences: an International Journal10.1016/j.ins.2024.120994678:COnline publication date: 1-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Campus Information Visualization Management and Design Using the K-means Data Analysis MethodProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Information Education and Artificial Intelligence10.1145/3660043.3660086(241-246)Online publication date: 22-Dec-2023

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media