Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Failure prioritization and control using the neutrosophic best and worst method

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Granular Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Failure prioritization process is described by identifying potential failures and its effects, quantifying their priorities and determining appropriate ways to mitigate or control. In the literature, many approaches are suggested to prioritize failures and associated effects quantitatively. Multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches are forefront that they can express the failures verbally based on decision-makers’ judgments. They explain different types of uncertainties, which are generally modeled by fuzzy sets. However, fuzzy sets focus only on one membership value in decision-making. At this point, neutrosophic sets are more suitable than classical fuzzy sets by proposing three membership values named truth-membership, indeterminacy-membership and falsity-membership. Therefore, in this study, a novel approach based on the neutrosophic best and worst method (NBWM) is proposed and a case study is also performed in the implant production. The best and worst method (BWM) is merged with neutrosophic sets since it has fewer pairwise comparisons while determining the importance weights of failures. To show the applicability of the approach, a case study in an implant manufacturing plant that produces many products, including implants in different shapes and sizes in Turkey is carried out. Besides the case study, a comparative study is performed to test the validity of the proposed NBWM approach. This approach can make the decision-making process more dynamic in real-world problems with indeterminate and inconsistent information, considering the benefits of BWM and neutrosophic sets either individually or in integration. The present study contributes to the knowledge both methodologically and in an application by proposing NBWM for failure assessment problems for the first time in the literature and creating an adaptive model for manufacturing and other industries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdel-Baset M, Chang V, Gamal A, Smarandache F (2019) An integrated neutrosophic ANP and VIKOR method for achieving sustainable supplier selection: a case study in importing field. Comput Ind 106:94–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Zhou Y, Hezam I (2017) Multi-criteria group decision making based on neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 33(6):4055–4066

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed M, Sangaiah AK (2018a) Neutrosophic AHP-Delphi Group decision-making model based on trapezoidal neutrosophic numbers. J Ambient Intell Humanized Computing 9(5):1427–1443

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Basset M, Manogaran G, Gamal A, Smarandache F (2018b) A hybrid approach of neutrosophic sets and DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection criteria. Design Autom Embed Syst 22(3):257–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Adem A, Çolak A, Dağdeviren M (2018) An integrated model using SWOT analysis and Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set for evaluation occupational safety risks in life cycle of wind turbine. Saf Sci 106:184–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad WNKW, Rezaei J, Sadaghiani S, Tavasszy LA (2017) Evaluation of the external forces affecting the sustainability of oil and gas supply chain using best worst method. J Clean Prod 153:242–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmadi HB, Kusi-Sarpong S, Rezaei J (2017) Assessing the social sustainability of supply chains using best worst method. Resour Conserv Recycl 126:99–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Ak MF, Gul M (2019) AHP–TOPSIS integration extended with pythagorean fuzzy sets for information security risk analysis. Complex Intell Syst 5(2):113–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2015) Cosine similarity measure based multi-attribute decision-making with trapezoidal fuzzy neutrosophic numbers. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 8:46–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Biswas P, Pramanik S, Giri BC (2016) TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Comput Appl 27(3):727–737

    Google Scholar 

  • Büyüközkan G, Göçer F (2019) Smart medical device selection based on intuitionistic fuzzy Choquet integral. Soft Comput 23(20):10085–10103

    Google Scholar 

  • Can GF (2018) An intuitionistic approach based on failure mode and effect analysis for prioritizing corrective and preventive strategies. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Ind. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen SM, Yang MW, Yang SW, Sheu TW, Liau CJ (2012) Multicriteria fuzzy decision making based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Expert Syst Appl 39(15):12085–12091

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen SM, Cheng SH, Lan TC (2016) Multicriteria decision making based on the TOPSIS method and similarity measures between intuitionistic fuzzy values. Inf Sci 367:279–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi P, Liu P (2013) An extended TOPSIS method for the multiple attribute decision making problems based on interval neutrosophic set. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 1(1):63–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Deli I, Subas Y (2014) Single valued neutrosophic numbers and their applications to multicriteria decision making problem. Neutrosophic Sets Syst 2(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Deli I, Şubaş Y (2017a) Some weighted geometric operators with SVTrN-numbers and their application to multi-criteria decision making problems. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(1):291–301

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Deli I, Şubaş Y (2017b) A ranking method of single valued neutrosophic numbers and its applications to multi-attribute decision making problems. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(4):1309–1322

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg H (2019) Algorithms for possibility linguistic single-valued neutrosophic decision-making based on COPRAS and aggregation operators with new information measures. Measurement 138:278–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg H, Nancy (2019) Multiple criteria decision making based on frank Choquet Heronian mean operator for single-valued neutrosophic sets. Appl Comput Math 18(2):163–188

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gul M (2018a) A review of occupational health and safety risk assessment approaches based on multi-criteria decision-making methods and their fuzzy versions. Hum Ecolog Risk Assess 24(7):1723–1760

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M (2018b) Application of Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and VIKOR methods in occupational health and safety risk assessment: the case of a gun and rifle barrel external surface oxidation and coloring unit. Int J Occup Safety Ergon. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1492251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Ak MF (2018) A comparative outline for quantifying risk ratings in occupational health and safety risk assessment. J Clean Prod 196:653–664

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Guneri AF (2016) A fuzzy multi criteria risk assessment based on decision matrix technique: a case study for aluminum industry. J Loss Prev Process Ind 40:89–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Ak MF, Guneri AF (2017a) Occupational health and safety risk assessment in hospitals: a case study using two-stage fuzzy multi-criteria approach. Hum Ecolog Risk Assess 23(2):187–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Celik E, Akyuz E (2017b) A hybrid risk-based approach for maritime applications: the case of ballast tank maintenance. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 23(6):1389–1403

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Guneri AF, Baskan M (2018a) An occupational risk assessment approach for construction and operation period of wind turbines. Glob J Environ Sci Manage 4(3):281–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Guven B, Guneri AF (2018b) A new Fine–Kinney-based risk assessment framework using FAHP-FVIKOR incorporation. J Loss Prev Process Ind 53:3–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Guneri AF, Nasirli SM (2019) A fuzzy-based model for risk assessment of routes in oil transportation. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16(8):4671–4686

    Google Scholar 

  • Gul M, Yucesan M, Serin F, Celik E (2018d) A simulation model to improve production processes in an implant manufacturing plant. In: 21st International research/expert conference”trends in the development of machinery and associated technology” TMT 2018, Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic, 18th–22nd September, (pp 177–180)

  • Guo S, Zhao H (2017) Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowl-Based Syst 121:23–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Guo J, Lin Z, Zu L, Chen J (2019) Failure modes and effects analysis for CO2 transmission pipelines using a hesitant fuzzy VIKOR method. Soft Comput 23(20):10321–10338

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H (2018) Evaluating service quality of airline industry using hybrid best worst method and VIKOR. J Air Trans Manage 68:35–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta H, Barua MK (2016) Identifying enablers of technological innovation for Indian MSMEs using best–worst multi criteria decision making method. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 107:69–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta P, Anand S, Gupta H (2017) Developing a roadmap to overcome barriers to energy efficiency in buildings using best worst method. Sustain Cities Soc 31:244–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafezalkotob A, Hafezalkotob A (2017) A novel approach for combination of individual and group decisions based on fuzzy best-worst method. Appl Soft Comput 59:316–325

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ilbahar E, Karaşan A, Cebi S, Kahraman C (2018) A novel approach to risk assessment for occupational health and safety using Pythagorean fuzzy AHP & fuzzy inference system. Saf Sci 103:124–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Karasan A, Ilbahar E, Cebi S, Kahraman C (2018) A new risk assessment approach: safety and critical effect analysis (SCEA) and its extension with pythagorean fuzzy sets. Saf Sci 108:173–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanmohammadi E, Zandieh M, Tayebi T (2019) Drawing a strategy canvas using the fuzzy best-worst method. Glob J Flex Syst Manage 20(1):57–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Kheybari S, Kazemi M, Rezaei J (2019) Bioethanol facility location selection using best-worst method. Appl Energy 242:612–623

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang R, Wang J, Zhang H (2017a) Evaluation of e-commerce websites: an integrated approach under a single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic environment. Knowl Based Syst 135:44–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang W, Zhao G, Wu H (2017b) Evaluating investment risks of metallic mines using an extended TOPSIS method with linguistic neutrosophic numbers. Symmetry 9(8):149

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao H, Mi X, Yu Q, Luo L (2019) Hospital performance evaluation by a hesitant fuzzy linguistic best worst method with inconsistency repairing. J Clean Prod 232:657–671

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu P, Chen SM (2018) Multiattribute group decision making based on intuitionistic 2-tuple linguistic information. Inf Sci 430:599–619

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu P, Chen SM, Liu J (2017) Multiple attribute group decision making based on intuitionistic fuzzy interaction partitioned Bonferroni mean operators. Inf Sci 411:98–121

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu P, Liu J, Chen SM (2018) Some intuitionistic fuzzy Dombi Bonferroni mean operators and their application to multi-attribute group decision making. J Oper Res Soc 69(1):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo M, Wu L, Zhou K, Zhang H (2019) Multi-criteria decision making method Based on the single valued neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 37(2):2403–2417

    Google Scholar 

  • Malek J, Desai TN (2019) Prioritization of sustainable manufacturing barrier s using best worst method. J Clean Prod In Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massaglia S, Borra D, Peano C, Sottile F, Merlino VM (2019) Consumer preference heterogeneity evaluation in fruit and vegetable purchasing decisions using the best-worst approach. Foods 8(7):266

    Google Scholar 

  • Mete S (2018) Assessing occupational risks in pipeline construction using FMEA based AHP–MOORA integrated approach under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1546115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meticulous research center (2017) Dental implants market by material, type, structure-global forecast to 2022

  • Mou Q, Xu Z, Liao H (2016) An intuitionistic fuzzy multiplicative best-worst method for multi-criteria group decision making. Inf Sci 374:224–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Nawaz F, Asadabadi MR, Janjua NK, Hussain OK, Chang E, Saberi M (2018) An MCDM method for cloud service selection using a Markov chain and the best-worst method. Knowl Based Syst 159:120–131

    Google Scholar 

  • Oz NE, Mete S, Serin F, Gul M (2018) Risk assessment for clearing & grading process of a natural gas pipeline project: an extended TOPSIS model with pythagorean fuzzy sets for prioritizing hazards. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. 10:11. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1495057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozdemir Y, Gul M, Celik E (2017) Assessment of occupational hazards and associated risks in fuzzy environment: a case study of a university chemical laboratory. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 23(4):895–924

    Google Scholar 

  • Pamučar D, Petrović I, Ćirović G (2018) Modification of the Best-Worst and MABAC methods: a novel approach based on interval-valued fuzzy-rough numbers. Expert Syst Appl 91:89–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng X, Dai J (2018) A bibliometric analysis of neutrosophic set: two decades review from 1998 to 2017. Artif Intell Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9652-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53:49–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J (2016) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: some properties and a linear model. Omega 64:126–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J, Wang J, Tavasszy L (2015) Linking supplier development to supplier segmentation using best worst method. Expert Syst Appl 42(23):9152–9164

    Google Scholar 

  • Rezaei J, Nispeling T, Sarkis J, Tavasszy L (2016) A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method. J Clean Prod 135:577–588

    Google Scholar 

  • Salimi N, Rezaei J (2016) Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method. Scientometrics 109(3):1911–1938

    Google Scholar 

  • Shojaei P, Haeri SAS, Mohammadi S (2018) Airports evaluation and ranking model using Taguchi loss function, best-worst method and VIKOR technique. J Air Trans Manage 68:4–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Smarandache, F. (2002). Neutrosophy and neutrosophic logic. In: First International Conference on Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Logic, Set, Probability, and Statistics University of New Mexico, Gallup, NM (Vol 87301, pp 338–353)

  • van de Kaa G, Kamp L, Rezaei J (2017) Selection of biomass thermochemical conversion technology in the Netherlands: a best worst method approach. J Clean Prod 166:32–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang CY, Chen SM (2017) Multiple attribute decision making based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets, linear programming methodology, and the extended TOPSIS method. Inf Sci 397:155–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang Y, Sunderraman R (2010) Single valued neutrosophic sets. Infinite Study

  • Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ (2010) Sunderraman R single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace Multistruct 4:410–413 (Kalyan Mondal, and Surapati Pramanik)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Liu X, Qin Y (2018a) A fuzzy Fine-Kinney-based risk evaluation approach with extended MULTIMOORA method based on Choquet integral. Comput Ind Eng 125:111–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang W, Liu X, Qin Y, Fu Y (2018b) A risk evaluation and prioritization method for FMEA with prospect theory and Choquet integral. Saf Sci 110:152–163

    Google Scholar 

  • William MA, Devadoss AV, Sheeba JJ (2013) A study on Neutrosophic cognitive maps (NCMs) by analyzing the risk factors of breast cancer. Int J Sci Eng Res 4(2):1–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Yazdi M (2017) Hybrid probabilistic risk assessment using fuzzy FTA and fuzzy AHP in a process industry. J Fail Anal Prev 17(4):756–764

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye J (2013) Multicriteria decision-making method using the correlation coefficient under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Int J Gen Syst 42(4):386–394

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ye J (2014) A multicriteria decision-making method using aggregation operators for simplified neutrosophic sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(5):2459–2466

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ye J (2015a) Improved cosine similarity measures of simplified neutrosophic sets for medical diagnoses. Artif Intell Med 63(3):171–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Ye J (2015b) Trapezoidal neutrosophic set and its application to multiple attribute decision-making. Neural Comput Appl 26(5):1157–1166

    Google Scholar 

  • You X, Chen T, Yang Q (2016) Approach to multi-criteria group decision-making problems based on the best-worst-method and ELECTRE method. Symmetry 8(9):95

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Yucesan M, Kahraman G (2019) Risk evaluation and prevention in hydropower plant operations: a model based on Pythagorean fuzzy AHP. Energy Policy 126:343–351

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inform Control 8(3):338–353

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Munzur University, 62000, Tunceli, Turkey

    Melih Yucesan

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Munzur University, 62000, Tunceli, Turkey

    Muhammet Gul

Authors
  1. Melih Yucesan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Muhammet Gul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammet Gul.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yucesan, M., Gul, M. Failure prioritization and control using the neutrosophic best and worst method. Granul. Comput. 6, 435–449 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41066-019-00206-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41066-019-00206-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation