KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Gazi University Journal of Science / 2026 / Volume: 39 Issue: 2

Evaluation of Green Energy Alternatives Using an Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy Methodology

Serhat Aydın(MİLLİ SAVUNMA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0861-8297
Mehmet Kabak(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8576-5349
Cengiz Kahraman(İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6168-8185
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2026-06-01
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Finally, a comparison analysis is provided.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Increasing apprehension regarding climate change, resource scarcity, and ecological deterioration has propelled the global momentum toward sustainable energy development.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri: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.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Finally, a comparison analysis is provided.
🔬Tür:Research Article
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:MCDM · Fuzzy sets · Pythagorean fuzzy sets

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.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Aydın, S., Kabak, M., Kahraman, C. (2026). Evaluation of Green Energy Alternatives Using an Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy Methodology. Gazi University Journal of Science, Volume: 39 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.1715371

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (32)

  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).
  9. Liang, D., Darko, A. P., and Zeng, J., “Interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy power average-based MULTIMOORA method for multi-criteria decision-making”, Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 32(5): 845-874, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2019.1694589
  10. Haktanır, E., and Kahraman, C., “A novel interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy QFD method and its application to solar photovoltaic technology development”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 132: 361-372, (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.04.022
  11. Du, Y., Hou, F., Zafar, W., Yu, Q., and Zhai, Y., “A novel method for multiattribute decision making with interval‐valued Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic information”, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32(10): 1085-1112, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21881
  12. Rahman, M., Akter, S., and Abdullah, S., “An integrated decision-making approach based on interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets for multi-criteria decision-making problems”. Mathematics, 7(1): 27, (2019).
  13. Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K., and Zhang, L., “A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy environment”, Expert Systems with Applications, 121: 1-17, (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.010
  14. Tang, X., Wei, G., and Gao, H., “Models for multiple attribute decision making with interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy muirhead mean operators and their application to green suppliers selection”, Informatica, 30(1): 153-186, (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/INF-2019-1208
  15. Yang, Y., Chen, Z. S., Chen, Y. H., and Chin, K. S., “Interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy frank power aggregation operators based on an isomorphic frank dual triple”, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 11(1): 1091-1110, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/ijcis.11.1.83
  16. Haktanır, E., and Kahraman, C., "Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award assessment using interval valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets", Intelligent and Fuzzy Techniques in Big Data Analytics and Decision Making, INFUS 2019, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1029: 694-701, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23756-1_129
  17. Haktanır, E., “Interval valued pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators based malcolm baldrige national quality award assessment”, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 39(5): 6431-6441, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-189108
  18. Haktanir, E., “Prioritization of competitive suppliers using an interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy QFD & COPRAS methodology”, Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic & Soft Computing, 34, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/22-INFOR476
  19. Li, H., Cao, Y., Su, L., and Xia, Q., “An interval pythagorean fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method based on similarity measures and connection numbers”, Information, 10(2): 80, (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/info10020080
  20. Xinshang, Y., and Zhe, Z., “A multi-attribute large group decision-making method based on interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy number”, In Machine Learning and Intelligent Computing, 430-440, (2024).
  21. Ma, Q., Sun, H., Chen, Z., and Tan, Y., “A novel MCDM approach for design concept evaluation based on interval-valued picture fuzzy sets”, Plos one, 18(11): e0294596, (2023). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294596
  22. Peng, X., and Yang, Y., “Fundamental properties of interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy aggregation operators”, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 31(5): 444-487, (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21790
  23. Rahman, K., Abdullah, S., Ahmed, R., and Ullah, M., “Pythagorean fuzzy Einstein weighted geometric aggregation operator and their application to multiple attribute group decision making”, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 33(1). 635-647, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-16797
  24. Wan, S.P., and Dong, J.Y., “A possibility degree method for interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 80(1): 237-256, (1990). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1521-7_1
  25. Xue, W oject investment decision making”, International Journal of Intelligence Systems, 33: 93-125, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21941
  26. Wei, G., and Wei, Y., “Similarity measures of pythagorean fuzzy sets based on the cosine function and application”, International Journal of Intelligence Systems, 33(3): 634-652, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21965
  27. https://sweden.se/climate/sustainability/energy-use-in-sweden. Access date: 05.02.2025.
  28. https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023. Access date: 12.03.2025.
  29. Iddrisu, I., and Bhattacharyya, S. C., “Sustainable energy development index: A multi-dimensional indicator for measuring sustainable energy development”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 50: 513-530, (2015). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.032
  30. Petrillo, A., De Felice, F., Jannelli, E., Autorino, C., Minutillo, M., and Lavadera, A. L., “Life cycle assessment and life cycle cost analysis model for a stand-alone hybrid renewable energy system”, Renewable Energy, 95: 337-355, (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.04.027
  31. Bhowmik, C., Bhowmik, S., and Ray, A. Optimal green energy source selection: An eclectic decision”, Energy & Environment, 31(5): 842-859, (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0958305X19882392
  32. Yu, C., Shao, Y., Wang, K., and Zhang, L., “A group decision making sustainable supplier selection approach using extended TOPSIS under interval-valued pythagorean fuzzy environment”, Expert Systems with Applications,121:1-17, (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.12.010