Complex Pythagorean Normal Interval-Valued Fuzzy Aggregation Operators for Solving Medical Diagnosis Problem

Abstract

This paper presents a new methodology for solving multiple-attribute decision-making problems (MADMs) using a complex Pythagorean normal interval-valued fuzzy set (CPNIVFS), which is an extended concept of a complex Pythagorean fuzzy set. Four types of different aggregating operations (AOs), including CPNIVF weighted averaging (CPNIVFWA), CPNIVF weighted geometric (CPNIVFWG), generalized CPNIVFWA (CGPNIVFWA), and generalized CPNIVFWG (CGPNIVFWG), are discussed. The scoring function, accuracy function, and operational laws of the CPNIVFS are defined. Algebraic structures, such as associative, distributive, idempotent, bounded, commutativity, and monotonicity properties, are also shown to be satisfied by complex Pythagorean normal interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Furthermore, an algorithm is proposed to solve the MADM problems based on the defined AOs. The proposed approach is then used for a medical diagnosis problem about brain tumors because computer science and machine tool technology are among the most important components of brain tumor research. The five types of brain tumors diagnosed in these patients are gliomas, meningiomas, metastases, embryonal tumors, and ependymomas. Several types of treatments are available, which are often combined as part of an overall treatment plan. Brain tumors can be treated in various ways, including surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and clinical trials. Based on the comparisons and options gathered, the most suitable treatment can be chosen. In this regard, it is evident that the value of the integer ⅁\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\Game $$\\end{document} plays a significant role in determining the model. The candidate models under consideration can be validated by comparing them with the previously proposed ones. The proposed technique is compared with the existing method to demonstrate its superiority and validity, and the results conclude that the former is more reliable and effective than the latter. Finally, the criteria are evaluated by expert assessments to determine the most appropriate options.