PIF-CIMAS-ARTASI

PIF-CIMAS-ARTASI - Hibrit PFS ağırlıklandırma + sıralama

İki aşamalı MAGDM: PIF-CIMAS ağırlık → PIF-ARTASI sıralama

Formül adımları

Analiz motorunun yöntem bildirimindeki (manifest F.steps) adımlar; raporlardaki formüllerle aynı kaynaktır.

Aşama 1 (PIF-CIMAS Adım 1-11): kriter ağırlıkları.

$S c (p) = (m u + 1 - e t a + 1 - n u) / 3; w_{h} = S c (E_{h}) / s u m S c (E_{k}); Z_{h j} = S c (Z ̃_{h j}); Y_{h j} = Z_{h j} / s u m_{h} Z_{h j}; L_{h j} = Y_{h j} * w_{h}; B_{j} = m a x L - m i n L; w_{j} = B_{j} / s u m B$

LaTeX
Sc(p) = (mu + 1 - eta + 1 - nu)/3 ; w_h = Sc(E_h)/sum Sc(E_k) ; Z_{hj}=Sc(Z̃_{hj}) ; Y_{hj}=Z_{hj}/sum_h Z_{hj} ; L_{hj}=Y_{hj}*w_h ; B_j = max L − min L ; w_j = B_j/sum B
Aşama 2 (PIF-ARTASI Adım 12-20): sıralama.

$s e e P I F - A R T A S I F . s t e p s F 1 - F 9; w e i g h t s w_{j} c o n s u m e d f r o m S t a g e 1$

LaTeX
see PIF-ARTASI F.steps F1-F9; weights w_j consumed from Stage 1

Yöntem ayrıntıları kaynak kütüphanedeki özgün (İngilizce) metindir.

Sezgi

Two-stage MAGDM: PIF-CIMAS criterion weights → PIF-ARTASI alternative ranking. Output typically utility (higher value = preferred).

Sonucu okuma: Two-stage MAGDM hybrid: stage 1 = PIF-CIMAS computes criterion weights from expert assessments; stage 2 = PIF-ARTASI ranks alternatives. The reliability index RI from stage 1 must be < 0.1 before proceeding.

Varsayımlar

Decision matrix entries are valid Picture Fuzzy numbers/tuples
Underlying crisp method's compensation assumption holds in uncertain space
All decision-maker(s) and experts use the same linguistic/uncertainty scale

Ne zaman kullanılmaz

Classical data sufficient - use base CIMAS-ARTASI directly (avoid unnecessary uncertainty layer)
Aggregation operator (PFWA/PFOWA/etc.) not specified - output ambiguous

Sınırlılıklar

Assumes: Decision matrix entries are valid Picture Fuzzy numbers/tuples
Assumes: Underlying crisp method's compensation assumption holds in uncertain space
Assumes: All decision-maker(s) and experts use the same linguistic/uncertainty scale

Sık yapılan hatalar

RI kontrolü atlanırsa.
Nitel/nicel ayrımı.

Hesap adımları ve dayanakları

Stage 1 (PIF-CIMAS, Steps 1-11): Given expert importance PFS E_h and per-(expert,criterion) PFS Z̃_{hj}: Sc(E_h) → w_h ; Z_{hj} = Sc(Z̃_{hj}) ; Ỹ_{hj} = Z_{hj}/Σ_h Z_{hj} ; L_{hj} = Ỹ_{hj}·w_h ; B_j = max_h L_{hj} − min_h L_{hj} ; w_j = B_j/Σ_j B_j ; second-round RI check (RI < 0.1).

Dayanak: Kara et al. 2024, §2.2 Steps 1-11 (Eqs 5-14)
Stage 2 (PIF-ARTASI, Steps 12-20): Given per-expert PFS decision matrices W̃^{(h)} and criterion weights w_j from Stage 1: PFWA aggregate (Wang 2017) → U=Sc(W̃) → adaptive bounds (S^max, S^min) → two-level standardization (R, C with β^l=1, β^u=100) → V^+, V^- (Tatar 2025 reversal-on-cost-only) → N^+, N^- → K_i = (N^+ + N^-)·[ψ·N^+τ + (1−ψ)·N^-τ]^{1/τ}; defaults ψ=0.5, τ=1.

Dayanak: Kara et al. 2024, §2.2 Steps 12-20 (Eqs 15-26); Tatar 2025 corrections