Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfalls🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Decision-making›Dual Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS
MCDMRankinghesitant

Dual Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS

DHF-TOPSIS (Dual Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS) is a ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Wang, R., Li, W., Zhang, T., Han, Q. in 2020. It turns a decision matrix of alternatives scored on multiple criteria into a structured, reproducible result.

ScholarGate
  1. MCDM
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

DHF-TOPSIS
AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC

When to use it

DHF-TOPSIS (Wang et al. 2020) extends classical TOPSIS to Dual Hesitant Fuzzy assessments. Operations are performed directly on DHFEs without length-equalisation: A⁺ and A⁻ are obtained from column-wise extrema of (h, g) components (direction-aware), the weighted generalised DHF distance d_wpg combines mean (G_m, G_n) and volatility (V_m, V_n) functions weighted by α and β (α+β=1), and alternatives are ranked in descending order of the closeness coefficient CC.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Follows a transparent, reproducible computational procedure that can be audited step by step.
  • Handles multiple criteria of differing scales and units within a single decision matrix.
Limitations
  • May exhibit rank reversal when alternatives are added to or removed from the set.
  • Assumes full compensation — a strong score on one criterion can offset a weak score on another.

Sources

  1. Wang, R., Li, W., Zhang, T., Han, Q. (2020). New Distance Measures for Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Sets and Their Application to Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Symmetry DOI: 10.3390/sym12020191 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 2). Dual Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/dhf-topsis

Related methods

AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • AHPDecision-making↔ compare
  • ANPDecision-making↔ compare
  • BWMDecision-making↔ compare
  • BWM-BAYESIANDecision-making↔ compare
  • CCSDDecision-making↔ compare
  • CILOSDecision-making↔ compare
  • CIMASDecision-making↔ compare
  • CRITICDecision-making↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

DHF-VIKORDHF-TODIMDHF-COPRASQR-TOPSISHF-TOPSISD-TOPSISMHF-TOPSISDHF-EDAS

Related reference concepts

Decision Support SystemsDecision MakingWeighted ScoresCriteria for Decision-Making under Risk and UncertaintyEvaluation CriteriaDecision Making Skills

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — DHF-TOPSIS (Dual Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/dhf-topsis · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Wang, R., Li, W., Zhang, T., Han, Q.
Subfamily
Ranking
Year
2020
Type
Dual Hesitant outranking/ranking — Dual Hesitant Fuzzy Element (DHFE: h(x) membership set, g(x) non-membership set)
Value Space
hesitant
Uncertainty
epistemic
Compensation
full
Rank Reversal
Yes
Related methods
AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account