Evaluation of Green Energy Alternatives Using an Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy Methodology
Abstract
Increasing apprehension regarding climate change, resource scarcity, and ecological deterioration has propelled the global momentum toward sustainable energy development. In this context, green energy has become an essential part of the shift away from fossil fuels and toward a future with lower carbon emissions. However, choosing the best green energy source for a certain application or specific area is a difficult task with many facets requiring consideration. Green energy solutions necessitate careful evaluation of a wide range of qualitative criteria in contrast to traditional energy sources. We put forward a hybrid fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) method using interval valued Pythagorean fuzzy numbers in this paper. The possibility degree method is used in the suggested approach to derive the weights of the evaluation criteria. Next, the matrix of decisions is created, and the preferred alternative is selected by entropy theory and cosine similarity theorem. Ultimately, our goal is to develop innovative, reliable techniques using these various theorems. Combining the advantages of each approach improves decision-making proceses as they increase precision and resilience and streamline the ability to handle complicated data in a variety of situations. We utilized the proposed method to evaluate green energy alternatives in Sweden to demonstrate applicability. A sensitivity analysis of the results is conducted to test how changes in input parameters affect the final ranking. Finally, a comparison analysis is provided.
Keywords
Supporting Institution
Ethical Statement
Thanks
References
- [1] https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2024/executive-summary. Access date: 15.03.2025.
- [2] Zadeh, L., “Fuzzy sets”, Information and Control, 8(3): 338-353, (1965). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
- [3] Zadeh, L. A., “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—I”, Information Sciences, 8(3): 199-249, (1975). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(75)90036-5
- [4] Atanassov, K., “Intuitionistic fuzzy sets", Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20(1): 87-96, (1986). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1870-3_1
- [5] Torra, V., “Hesitant fuzzy sets”, International journal of intelligent systems, 25(6):529-539, (2010). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20418
- [6] Smarandache, F., “A unifying field in logics: Neutrosophic logic”, In Philosophy, American Research Press.1-141, (1999).
- [7] Yager, R. R., “Pythagorean fuzzy subsets”, In 2013 joint IFSA world congress and NAFIPS annual meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS), Proceedings of The IEEE. 57-61, (2013). DOI: 10.1109/IFSA-NAFIPS.2013.6608375
- [8] Kutlu Gündoğdu, and F., Kahraman, C., “From 1D to 3D membership: spherical fuzzy sets”, BOS/SOR2018 Conference, Warsaw/POLAND (2018).
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Fuzzy Computation
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Serhat Aydın
*
0000-0003-0861-8297
Türkiye
Mehmet Kabak
0000-0002-8576-5349
Türkiye
Cengiz Kahraman
0000-0001-6168-8185
Türkiye
Early Pub Date
April 11, 2026
Publication Date
June 1, 2026
Submission Date
June 5, 2025
Acceptance Date
February 28, 2026
Published in Issue
Year 2026 Volume: 39 Number: 2