Indeterminacy Fuzzy TOPSIS Framework for Unmanned Stealth Aircraft Selection
Keywords:
Indeterminacy fuzzy sets, Indeterminacy Fuzzy TOPSIS, MCDM, Unmanned Stealth Aircraft Selection, Uncertainty, Decision Making, Criteria EvaluationAbstract
Decision-making problems in defense procurement are inherently complex due to multiple conflicting criteria, subjective expert judgments, and pervasive uncertainty. To address these challenges, this study proposes a comprehensive indeterminacy fuzzy TOPSIS (IFS–TOPSIS) framework for the selection of unmanned stealth aircraft in strategic national defense missions. Linguistic evaluations provided by multiple decision makers are modeled using indeterminacy fuzzy sets, allowing the simultaneous representation of truth, indeterminacy, and falsity degrees. Decision-maker importance and criterion weights are determined through indeterminacy fuzzy aggregation, while alternative performances are evaluated via a distance-based ideal solution approach.
The proposed framework is applied to a realistic case study involving three unmanned stealth aircraft alternatives evaluated against five key criteria: stealth capability, payload capacity, communication effectiveness, survivability, and affordability. The results identify the second alternative as the most suitable option, exhibiting the closest proximity to the positive ideal solution. Sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of the ranking under varying criterion weight scenarios, and a comparative analysis demonstrates the superior discrimination capability of the proposed method over classical TOPSIS. The findings indicate that IFS–TOPSIS provides a robust, transparent, and doctrine-aligned decision-support tool for defense system selection under uncertainty.
References
Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., Mostafa, N. N., El-Henawy, I. M., & Abouhawwash, M. (2022). New multi-criteria decision-making technique based on neutrosophic axiomatic design. Scientific Reports, 12, Article 10657. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14557-4
Ambrin, R., Ibrar, M., De La Sen, M., Rabbi, I., &Khan, A. (2021). Extended TOPSIS Method for Supplier Selection under Picture Hesitant Fuzzy Environment Using Linguistic Variables. Journal of Mathematics, 2021, Article 652586. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6652586
Ameen, Z. A., Salih, H. F. M., Alajlan, A. I., Mohammed, R. A., & Asaad, B. A. (2025). Enhanced MCDM Based on the TOPSIS Technique and Aggregation Operators Under the Bipolar pqr-Spherical Fuzzy Environment: An Application in Firm Supplier Selection. Applied Sciences, 15(7), Article 3597. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15073597
Ardil, C. (2020). A Comparative Analysis of Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis Methods for Strategic, Tactical, and Operational Decisions in Military Fighter Aircraft Selection. International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, 14(7), 275 -288.
Ardil, C. (2023a). Fuzzy Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Unmanned Combat Aircraft Selection Using Proximity Measure Method. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering, 17(3), 193 -200.
Ardil, C. (2023b). Commercial Aircraft Selection Decision Support Model Using Fuzzy Combinative Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing in Transportation, 3(2), 38-55. https://doi.org/10.30880/jsmt.2023.03.02.005
Ardil, C. (2024a). Indeterminacy Fuzzy Set-Based Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Stealth Combat Aircraft Selection. International Journal of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, 18(4), 116 -124.
Ardil, C. (2024b). Modeling Uncertainty in Multiple Criteria Decision Making Using the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution for the Selection of Stealth Combat Aircraft. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering, 18(4), 188 -198.
Ardil, C., Pashaev, A., Sadiqov, R., & Abdullayev, P. (2019). Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis for Selecting and Evaluating Fighter Aircraft. International Journal of Transport and Vehicle Engineering, 13(11), 683 -694.
Atanassov, K. T. &Gargov, G. (1989). Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 31(3), 343-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(89)90205-4
Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy sets and systems, 20(1), 87-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
Atanassov, K. T. (1989). More on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy sets and systems, 33(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(89)90215-7
Bakioğlu, G. (2025). Prioritization of Digital Technology Applications in Intermodal Freight Transport using CRITIC-based Picture Fuzzy TOPSIS Method.International Journal of Automotive Science and Technology (IJASTECH), 9(2), 230-240.https://doi.org/10.30939/ijastech..1639635
Bustince, H. (2010). Interval-valued Fuzzy Sets in Soft Computing.International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 3(2), 215-222. https://doi.org/10.1080/18756891.2010.9727692
Chen, C.-T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy sets and systems,114(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
Cuong, B. C. (2014). Picture fuzzy sets. Journal of Computer Science and Cybernetics, 30(4), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.15625/1813-9663/30/4/5032
Dinh, N. V., & Thao, N. X. (2018). Some measures of picture fuzzy sets and their application in multi-attribute decision making. International Journal of Mathematical Science and Computing, 4(3), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmsc.2018.03.03
Hwang, C., &Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
Jin, J., Zhao, P., & You, T. (2021). Picture fuzzy TOPSIS method based on CPFRS model: an application to risk management problems. Scientific Programming,2021(1), Article 628745. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6628745
Kacprzak, D. (2024). A new extension of the EDAS method in a fuzzy environment for group decision-making. DECISION, 51(3), 263-277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-024-00396-x
Karabašević, D., Stanujkić, D., Zavadskas, E. K., Stanimirović, P., Popović, G., Predić, B., & Ulutaş, A. (2020). A Novel Extension of the TOPSIS Method Adapted for the Use of Single-Valued Neutrosophic Sets and Hamming Distance for E-Commerce Development Strategies Selection.Symmetry, 12(8), Article 1263. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12081263
Kaya, İ., Çolak, M., &Terzi, F. (2019). A comprehensive review of fuzzy multi criteria decision making methodologies for energy policy making. Energy Strategy Reviews, 24, 207-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.03.003
Khan, S., Abdullah, S., & Ashraf, S. (2019). Picture fuzzy aggregation information based on Einstein operations and their application in decision making. Mathematical Sciences, 13(3), 213–229.
Kharal, A. (2014). A Neutrosophic Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method. New Mathematics and Natural Computation, 10(2), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793005714500070
Lanbaran, N. M., Celik, E., & Yigider, M. (2020). Evaluation of Investment Opportunities with Interval-Valued Fuzzy Topsis Method. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences,5(1), 461-474. https://doi.org/10.2478/amns.2020.1.00044
Mizumoto, M. &Tanaka, K. (1976). Some Properties of Fuzzy Sets of Type-2. Information and Control, 31(4), 312-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(76)80011-3
Rouyendegh, B. D. (2015). Developing an Integrated ANP and Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS Model for Supplier Selection. Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 43(3), 664–672.
Shafiee, M. (2015). Maintenance Strategy Selection Problem: An MCDM Overview. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 21(4), 378-402. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME-09-2013-0063
Smarandache, F. (2019). Neutrosophic Set is a Generalization of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set, Inconsistent Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set (Picture Fuzzy Set, Ternary Fuzzy Set), Pythagorean Fuzzy Set, Spherical Fuzzy Set, and q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Set, while Neutrosophication is aGeneralization of Regret Theory, Grey System Theory, and Three-Ways Decision (revisited). Journal of New Theory, (29), 1-35.
Torra, V. (2010). Hesitant fuzzy sets. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 25(6), 529-539. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20418
Turksen, I. B. (1986). Interval valued fuzzy sets based on normal forms. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20(2), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(86)90077-1
Tüysüz, N., & Kahraman, C. (2023). An integrated picture fuzzy Z-AHP & TOPSIS methodology: Application to solar panel selection. Applied Soft Computing, 149, Article 110951.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110951
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
Zadeh, L. A. (1975). The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning III. Information sciences, 9(1), 43–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(75)90017-1
Zeng, S., Qiyas, M., Arif, M., &Mahmood, T. (2019). Extended version of linguistic picture fuzzy TOPSIS method and its applications in enterprise resource planning systems. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2019, Article 594938. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8594938
