An Evaluation of Supermarkets from the Lens of Multiple Criteria: The Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS Method

Abstract

This study is an attempt to evaluate supermarkets by both the consumer and the market researcher through the intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. In this regard, the decision makers' views were expressed in linguistic terms and ranked from the most preferred supermarket to the least preferred supermarket. The satisfaction of using linguistic terms is that it gives decision makers the chance to express views that they cannot express in numerical values. Furthermore, undecided situations were interpreted through the IFS. This method, which may be easily used in many application areas, offers researchers more consistent results than the others due to its advantages. Besides, this study attempts to innovative implementation of the intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method on its algorithm and mathematical basis.

Keywords

• Intuitionistic fuzzy set
• Market selection
• Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS

References

1. Atanassov KT. 1986. Intuitionistic fuzzy set. Fuzzy Sets Syst, 20(1): 87-96.
2. Atanassov KT. 2016. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Bioautomation, 20(S1): 1-6.
3. Boran FE, Boran K, Menlik T. 2012. The evaluation of renewable energy technologies for electricity generation in turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Energy Sour Part B: Econ Plan Pol, 7(1): 81-90.
4. Boran FE, Genç S, Kurt M, Akay D. 2009. A Multi-Criteria Intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for supplier selection with TOPSIS Method. Expert Syst App, 36(8): 11363-11368.
5. Boran FE. 2011. An integrated intuitionistic fuzzy multi criteria decision making method for facility location selection. Math Comp App, 16(2): 487-496.
6. Büyüközkan G, Güleryüz S. 2015. An application of intuitionistic fuzzy topsis on mobile phone selection. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), August 2-5, 2015, Rockville, US, pp: 1-8.
7. Büyüközkan G. 2004. Multi-Criteria decision making for e-marketplace selection. Internet Res, 14(2): 139-154.
8. Çitil M. 2019. Application of the Intuitionistic fuzzy logic in education. Commun Math App, 10(1): 131-143.

9. Çuvalcıoğlu G. 2014. Some properties of controlled set theory. Notes on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set, 20(2): 37-42.
10. Damgacı E, Boran K, Boran FE. 2017. Evaluation of Turkey's renewable energy using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method. J Polytech, 20(3): 629-637.
11. Efe B, Boran FE, Kurt M. 2015. Ergonomic product concept selection using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Suleyman Demirel Univ J Eng Sci Design, 3(3): 433-440.
12. Ghorabaee MK, Amiri M, Zavadskas EK, Hooshmand R, Antucheviciene J. 2017. Fuzzy extension of the CODAS method for multi-criteria market segment evaluation. J Busin Econ Manag, 18(1): 1-19.
13. Gorecka D, Szałucka M. 2013. Country market selection in international expansion using multicriteria decision aiding methods. Mult CritDec Making, 8: 32-55.
14. Hwang CL, Yoon K. 1981. Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany, pp: 58-191.
15. Majumder M. 2017. Multi criteria decision making. Chapter 2, Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany, pp: 35-47.
16. Rouyendegh BD, Saputro TE. 2014. Supplier selection using integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP: a case study. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci, 116: 3957-3970.
17. Rouyendegh BD, Yıldızbaşı A, Arıkan ÜZ. 2018. Using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS in site selection of wind power plants in Turkey. Adv Fuzzy Sys, 2018: 6703798. DOI: 10.1155/2018/6703798.
18. Rouyendegh BD, Yıldızbaşı A, Üstünyer P. 2020. Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method for green supplier selection problem. Soft Comp, 24(3): 2215-2228.
19. Rouyendegh BD. 2011. The DEA and intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS approach to departments' performances: a pilot study. J App Math, 2011: 712194. DOI: 10.1155/2011/712194.
20. Rouyendegh BD. 2015. Developing an integrated ANP and intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS model for supplier selection. J Test Eval, 43(3): 664-672.
21. Sözeyatarlar M, Şahin M, Yavuz E. 2021. Statistical relations measures. J Universal Math, 4(2): 283-295.
22. Szmidt E, Kacprzyk J. 2000. Distances between intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst, 114: 505-518.
23. Tosun N. 2017. Target market selection in fresh fruit-vegetable sector using fuzzy VIKOR method. J Manag Mark Logis, 4(4): 465-471.
24. Tuğrul F, Çitil M. 2021. A new perspective on evaluation system in education with intuitionistic fuzzy logic and PROMETHEE algorithm. J Univ Math, 4(1): 13-24.
25. Wu Y, Zhang J, Yuan J, Geng S, Zhang H. 2016. Study of decision framework of offshore wind power station site selection based on ELECTRE-III under intuitionistic fuzzy environment: a case of China. Energy Convers Manag, 113: 66-81.
26. Xu ZS. 2007. Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. IEEE Transact Fuzzy Sys, 15: 1179-1187.
27. Yavuz E, Şahin M. 2022. Semiparametric regression models and applicability in agriculture. BSJ Agri, 5(2): 160-166.
28. Zadeh LA. 1965. Fuzzy Sets. Info Cont, 8: 1361-1375.