Skip to main content

Fine–Kinney-Based Occupational Risk Assessment Using Single-Valued Neutrosophic TOPSIS

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 398))

Abstract

Neutrosophic sets are initially recommended by Smarandache (First international conference on neutrosophy, neutrosophic logic, set, probability, and statistics. University of New Mexico, Gallup, NM, pp 338–353, 2002 [1]). These sets reflect uncertainty and vagueness in real-world problems better than classical fuzzy set theory. It takes into consideration three decision-making situations called indeterminacy, truthiness, and falsity. In Zadeh traditional fuzzy set theory, there is just membership function fuzzy set degree. But, in neutrosophic environment, it considers three membership functions. Unlike intuitionistic fuzzy sets, an indeterminacy degree is considered. In this chapter, we applied a special form of neutrosophic set as single-valued neutrosophic set (SVNs) with the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) under the concept of Fine–Kinney occupational risk assessment. Since the mere TOPSIS has failed to handle imprecise and vague information which usually exist in real-world problems, we follow the integration of SVNs and TOPSIS. To demonstrate the applicability of the novel approach, a case study of risk assessment of a wind turbine in times of operation was provided. Comparative analysis with some similar approaches and sensitivity analysis by changing the weights of Fine–Kinney parameters are carried out. Finally, the Python implementation of the proposed approach is executed to be useful for those concerned in the future.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Smarandache, F. (2002). Neutrosophy and neutrosophic logic. In First international conference on neutrosophy, neutrosophic logic, set, probability, and statistics (pp. 338–353). Gallup, NM: University of New Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Biswas, P., Pramanik, S., & Giri, B. C. (2016). TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment. Neural Computing and Applications, 27, 727–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liu, P., & Wang, Y. (2014). Multiple attribute decision-making method based on single valued neutrosophic normalized weighted Bonferroni mean. Neural Computing and Applications, 25, 2001–2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Majumdar, P., & Samanta, S. K. (2014). On similarity and entropy of neutrosophic sets. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 26, 1245–1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Yoon, K., & Hwang, C. (1981). TOPSIS (technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution)–a multiple attribute decision making, w: Multiple attribute decision making–methods and applications, a state-of-the-at survey. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yong, D. (2006). Plant location selection based on fuzzy TOPSIS. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 28, 839–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, T.-Y., & Tsao, C.-Y. (2008). The interval-valued fuzzy TOPSIS method and experimental analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 159, 1410–1428.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen, S.-M., & Lee, L.-W. (2010). Fuzzy multiple attributes group decision-making based on the interval type-2 TOPSIS method. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 2790–2798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Celik, E., Bilisik, O. N., Erdogan, M., et al. (2013). An integrated novel interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method to improve customer satisfaction in public transportation for Istanbul. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 58, 28–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cevik Onar, S., Oztaysi, B., & Kahraman, C. (2014). Strategic decision selection using hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS and interval type-2 fuzzy AHP: A case study. International Journal of Computational intelligence systems, 7, 1002–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Boran, F., Boran, K., & Menlik, T. (2012). The evaluation of renewable energy technologies for electricity generation in Turkey using intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning and Policy, 7, 81–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 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. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 23, 895–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ak, M. F., & Gul, M. (2018). AHP–TOPSIS integration extended with Pythagorean fuzzy sets for information security risk analysis. Complex & Intelligent Systems 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gul, M., & Ak, M. F. (2018). A comparative outline for quantifying risk ratings in occupational health and safety risk assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 653–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Oz, N. E., Mete, S., Serin, F., & Gul, M. (2018). Risk assessment for clearing and grading process of a natural gas pipeline project: An extended TOPSIS model with Pythagorean fuzzy sets for prioritizing hazards. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mete, S. (2019). Assessing occupational risks in pipeline construction using FMEA-based AHP-MOORA integrated approach under Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1546115.

  17. Mete, S., Serin, F., Oz, N. E., & Gul, M. (2019). A decision-support system based on Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR for occupational risk assessment of a natural gas pipeline construction. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 71, 102979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gul, M., Ak, M. F., & Guneri, A. F. (2019). Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR-based approach for safety risk assessment in mine industry. Journal of Safety Research, 69, 135–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gul, M., Guneri, A. F., & Baskan, M. (2018). An occupational risk assessment approach for construction and operation period of wind turbines. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 4(3), 281–298.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammet Gul .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gul, M., Mete, S., Serin, F., Celik, E. (2021). Fine–Kinney-Based Occupational Risk Assessment Using Single-Valued Neutrosophic TOPSIS. In: Fine–Kinney-Based Fuzzy Multi-criteria Occupational Risk Assessment. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 398. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52148-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52148-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-52147-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-52148-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics