A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes

Zarife Zararsız; Nagarajan Deivanayagam Pillai

doi:10.33401/fujma.1815409

A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes

Abstract

Diabetes during pregnancy is an important problem for both women's health and newborn health due to its lifelong effects starting from the womb and requires careful monitoring with a multidisciplinary approach. Although the risks continue after birth, problems that can extend into childhood, especially newborn respiratory diseases, jaundice, hypoglycemia and hypocalcemia, can be seen. This work proposes decision making system (DMS) that uses bipolar fuzzy credibility numbers (BFCN), multicriteria decision making (MDM) and TOPSIS procedures (techniques) to handle this problem. Pregnant women's risk of diabetes will be evaluated using this method. The importance and necessity of the BFCN in the issue of uncertain decision-making are demonstrated by the degree of credibility of the vague assessment measure. The uncertain judgment measures should be closely linked to their credibility measures in order to increase the degrees of credibility and the credibility levels of vague assessment standards. This will increase the accessibility and reliability of evaluation data. Namely, in the work, the factors that trigger diabetes during pregnancy in women were investigated, the symptoms that manifested these factors were determined and the risks and effects of this condition on maternal and fetal health were examined. Additionally, a ranking model and comparison are given for BFCNs in the last section via score and accuracy matrices.

Keywords

References

[1] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inf. Control, 8(3) (1965), 338–353. $\href{https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/34248666540?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:A19656567900007}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[2] K. Atanassov, S. Stoeva, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Polish Symp. on Interval and Fuzzy Mathematics, Poznan, (1983) 23-26.
[3] M. Abdel-Basset, M. Saleh, A. Gamal and F. Smarandache, An approach of TOPSIS technique for developing supplier selection with group decision making under type-2 neutrosophic number, Appl. Soft Comput., 77 (2019), 438-452. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.01.035}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85061254430?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000462042200033}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[4] S.J. Chen and C.L. Hwang, Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, (1992). $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-46768-4}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} $
[5] M. Khan, S. Anis, F. Smarandache and Y.B. Jun, Neutrosophic N structures and their applications in semigroups, Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform., 14(6) (2017), 583–598. $\href{https://fs.unm.edu/neut/NeutrosophicNStructures.pdf}{\mbox{[Web]}} $
[6] G. Muhiuddin, F. Smarandache and Y.B. Jun, Neutrosophic quadruple ideals in neutrosophic quadruple BCI-algebras, NSS, 25 (2019), 161-173. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2631518}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000471293800011}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[7] F. Smarandache, Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic Logic. Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Set, neutrosophic probability, American Research Press, Rehoboth, (1999). $ \href{https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.math/0101228}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} $
[8] W.R. Zhang, Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations: a computational framework for cognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis, First International Joint Conference of The North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society Biannual Conference, San Antonio, USA, 305-309, (1994),. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCF.1994.375115}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0028736025?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} $

[9] S. Samanta, M. Pal, Some more results on BF sets and BF intersection graphs, J. Fuzzy Math. 22(2)(2014), 253–262. $ \href{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264348087_Some_More_Results_on_Bipolar_Fuzzy_Sets_and_Bipolar_Fuzzy_Intersection_Graphs}{\mbox{[Web]}} $
[10] P.K. Singh and C.A. Kumar, BF graph representation of concept lattice, Inf. Sci.,288(2014),437–488. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.07.038}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84973867030?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000343345500026}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[11] L.H. Yang, S.G. Li, V. Yang and Y. Lu, Notes on ”Bipolar fuzzy graphs”, Inf. Sci.,242 (2013), 113–121. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.03.049}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84878110115?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} $
[12] Z. Zararsız and M. Riaz, Bipolar fuzzy metric spaces with application, Comput. Appl. Math., 41(1) (2022), 49. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-021-01754-6}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85122922704?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000742003000001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[13] Z. Zararsız, New Aczel–Alsina components for bipolar fuzzy numbers and their use in multi-attribute decision making, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., 132 (2024), 108000. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2024.108000}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85184072041?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001173555200001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[14] P.R. Innocent and R.I. John, Computer aided fuzzy medical diagnosis, Inf. Sci.,162 (2004), 81-104. $\href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2004.03.003}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/2342469372?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000221858800003}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[15] K.M. Lee, Bipolar valued fuzzy sets and their applications, Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Technologies,, Bangkok, Thailand, (2000), 307-312.
[16] K.M. Lee, K.M. Lee and K.J. Cios, Comparison of interval-valued fuzzy sets, intuitionistic fuzzy sets, and bipolar-valued fuzzy sets, J. Korean Inst. Intell. Syst., 14(2) (2004), 125–129. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.5391/JKIIS.2004.14.2.125}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000229668100055}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[17] M. Aslam, M. Tahir and Z.Hussain, Reliability analysis of three-component mixture of distributions, Sci. Iran., 25(3),(2018) 1768-1781. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.24200/sci.2017.4441}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85049199579?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000439033500010}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[18] M. Rahimi and A. Najaf, Analysis of customer’s expectations and satisfaction in Zanjan municipality using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making (FMCDM) approach, J. Optim. Ind. Eng., 10(21)(2016),47–57. $\href{https://doi.org/10.22094/joie.2016.260}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} $
[19] M. Riaz, H.M.A. Farid and F. Karaaslan, Linear diophantine fuzzy aggregation operators with multi-criteria decision-making, J. Comput. Cogn. Eng., 4(1) (2023), 24-35. $\href{https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewJCCE3202420}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/86000058031?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} $
[20] Y. Sun, J.S. Mi, J.K. Chen and W. Liu, A new fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making method with generalized maximal consistent block and its application in emergency management, Knowl.-Based Syst., 215(2021), 106594. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.106594}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85099512433?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000620459300012}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[21] Y.M. Wang, H.Y. Yang and K.Y. Qin, The consistency between cross-entropy and distance measures in fuzzy sets, Symmetry, 11(3)(2019), 386. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11030386}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85067306249?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000464417300001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[22] E. Yadegaridehkordi, M. Hourmand, M. Nilashi, E. Alsolami, S. Samad, M. Mahmoud, et al., Assessment of sustainability indicators for green building manufacturing using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach, J. Clean. Prod., 277 (2020), 122905. $\href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122905}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85089440956?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000586917600023}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[23] J. Ye, Expected value method for intuitionistic trapezoidal fuzzy multicriteria decision-making problems, Expert Syst. Appl., 38(9) (2011), 11730–11734. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.059}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/79955642369?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000291118500115}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[24] S. Ayouni, L. J. Menzli, F. Hajjej, M. Maddeh and S. Al-Otaibi, Fuzzy Vikor application for learning management systems evaluation in higher education, Int. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. Educ., 17(2) (2021), 17–35. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.2021040102}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85106013520?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000616413300002}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[25] M.J. Bender and S.P. Simonovic, A fuzzy compromise approach to water resource systems planning under uncertainty, Fuzzy Set. Syst., 115(1) (2000), 35–44. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(99)00025-1}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0034301494?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000088643600004}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[26] H. Garg, A new generalized Pythagorean fuzzy information aggregation using Einstein operations and its application to decision making, Int. J. Intell. Syst., 31 (2016), 886–920. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21809}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84958576320?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000380924500003}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[27] Tehreem, A. Hussain and A. Alsanad, Novel Dombi aggregation operators in spherical cubic fuzzy information with applications in multiple attribute decision-making, Math. Probl. Eng., (2021), 9921553. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9921553}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85115001301?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000695390200001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[28] C.S. Tsou, Multi-objective inventory planning using MOPSO and TOPSIS, Expert Syst. Appl., 35(1-2)(2008), 136-142. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.06.009}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/44949145426?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000257617100013}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[29] C.L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, (1981). $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} $
[30] K.P. Yoon and C.L. Hwang, Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Sage publications, 104 (1995). $ \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:A1997WU04400017}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[31] H. Deng, C.H. Yeh and R. Willis, Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights, Comput. Op. Res., 27(10) (2000), 963–973. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(99)00069-6}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0034074074?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000087278000003}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[32] R.R. Yager, Pythagorean membership grades in multicriteria decision making, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 22(4) (2014), 958–965. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2278989}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84905584959?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000344661600020}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[33] C.T. Chen, Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Set. Syst.,114(1) (2000), 1–9. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0002296389?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000087659100001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[34] M. Collan and P. Luukka, Evaluating R and D drojects as investments by using an overall ranking from four new fuzzy similarity measurebased TOPSIS variants, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 22(3) (2014), 505–515. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2260758}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84901984459?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000337128900004}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[35] D.C. Liang and Z.S. Xu, The new extension of TOPSIS method for multiple criteria decision making with hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy sets, Appl. Soft Comput., 60(2017), 167–179. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2017.06.034}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85021809559?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000414072200012}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[36] Z. Zararsız, Development of a mathematical model using BF credibility number and application of intelligent logistics management and warehousing to a multi-attribute decision making method, Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manag. 16(9) (2025), 3151–3167. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-025-02849-7}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105012376368?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001541836200001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[37] İ. Demir, M. Saldamlı and M. Okurer, Bipolar fuzzy soft filter and its application to multi-criteria group decision-making, Filomat, 39(10) (2025), 3297–3313. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL2510297D}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105001409830?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001469410600008}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[38] E. Natarajan and F. Augustin,A BF decision-making system for assessing high-risk coexisting tuberculosis disease in pregnant women, Heliyon, 10(11) (2024). $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31416}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85193814755?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001246021600001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[39] M. Yahya, S. Abdullah, F. Khan, K. Safeen and R. Ali, Multi-criteria decision support models under fuzzy credibility rough numbers and their application in green supply selection, Heliyon, 10(4)(2024), 122905. $ \href{ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25818}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85185798608?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001188605300001}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $
[40] J. Goetschel and W. Voxman, Elementary fuzzy calculus, Fuzzy Set. Syst.,18(1) (1986),31–43. $ \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(86)90026-6}{\mbox{[CrossRef]}} \href{https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/46149135272?origin=resultslist}{\mbox{[Scopus]}} \href{https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:A1986A320000003}{\mbox{[Web of Science]}} $

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Mathematical Methods and Special Functions

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Zarife Zararsız ^*
0000-0003-4173-672X
Türkiye

Nagarajan Deivanayagam Pillai This is me
India

Publication Date

March 30, 2026

Submission Date

November 1, 2025

Acceptance Date

February 3, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.33401/fujma.1815409

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA27UM42HL

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Zararsız, Z., & Deivanayagam Pillai, N. (2026). A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes. Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications, 9(1), 31-42. https://doi.org/10.33401/fujma.1815409

AMA

1.Zararsız Z, Deivanayagam Pillai N. A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes. Fundam. J. Math. Appl. 2026;9(1):31-42. doi:10.33401/fujma.1815409

Chicago

Zararsız, Zarife, and Nagarajan Deivanayagam Pillai. 2026. “A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes”. Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications 9 (1): 31-42. https://doi.org/10.33401/fujma.1815409.

EndNote

Zararsız Z, Deivanayagam Pillai N (March 1, 2026) A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes. Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications 9 1 31–42.

IEEE

[1]Z. Zararsız and N. Deivanayagam Pillai, “A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes”, Fundam. J. Math. Appl., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 31–42, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.33401/fujma.1815409.

ISNAD

Zararsız, Zarife - Deivanayagam Pillai, Nagarajan. “A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes”. Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications 9/1 (March 1, 2026): 31-42. https://doi.org/10.33401/fujma.1815409.

JAMA

1.Zararsız Z, Deivanayagam Pillai N. A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes. Fundam. J. Math. Appl. 2026;9:31–42.

MLA

Zararsız, Zarife, and Nagarajan Deivanayagam Pillai. “A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes”. Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications, vol. 9, no. 1, Mar. 2026, pp. 31-42, doi:10.33401/fujma.1815409.

Vancouver

1.Zarife Zararsız, Nagarajan Deivanayagam Pillai. A Bipolar Fuzzy Credibility Decision-Making Technique for Evaluating Pregnant Women With Extremely Risky Comorbid Diabetes. Fundam. J. Math. Appl. 2026 Mar. 1;9(1):31-42. doi:10.33401/fujma.1815409