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›LPF-CRITIC-EDAS — Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy EDAS with CRITIC weighting (Akram-Ramzan-Deveci 2023)
MCDMRankingLinguistic pythagorean

LPF-CRITIC-EDAS — Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy EDAS with CRITIC weighting (Akram-Ramzan-Deveci 2023)

LPF-EDAS (LPF-CRITIC-EDAS — Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy EDAS with CRITIC weighting (Akram-Ramzan-Deveci 2023)) is a ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Akram, M., Ramzan, N., Deveci, M. in 1995 crisp; 2023 variant applicator. 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.

LPF-EDAS
EDAS

When to use it

LPF-EDAS uses linguistic Pythagorean fuzzy numbers (LPFN: (I_ψ, I_ζ) with ψ²+ζ² ≤ τ²) to encode expert linguistic judgments at granularity τ. Group judgments are aggregated via LPFHWA (Hamacher weighted average; algebraic at κ=1). CRITIC derives objective criterion weights from inter-criterion correlation and standard deviation. EDAS structure (PDA/NDA distances from average solution) produces the final appraisal score. The score function S(α) = √((τ²+ψ²−ζ²)/2) defuzzifies LPFNs throughout.

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. Akram, M., Ramzan, N., Deveci, M. (2023). Linguistic Pythagorean fuzzy CRITIC-EDAS method for multiple-attribute group decision analysis. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105777 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 2). LPF-CRITIC-EDAS — Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy EDAS with CRITIC weighting (Akram-Ramzan-Deveci 2023). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/lpf-edas

Related methods

EDAS

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.

  • EDASDecision-making↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

PF-EDASSF-EDASPIF-EDASDHF-EDASPL-EDASPHF-EDASL2T-EDASQR-EDAS

Related reference concepts

Decision Support SystemsDecision MakingWeighted ScoresEvaluation CriteriaDecision Making SkillsLinear Discriminant Analysis

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

ScholarGate — LPF-EDAS (LPF-CRITIC-EDAS — Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy EDAS with CRITIC weighting (Akram-Ramzan-Deveci 2023)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/lpf-edas · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Akram, M., Ramzan, N., Deveci, M.
Subfamily
Ranking
Year
1995 crisp; 2023 variant applicator
Type
Linguistic Pythagorean fuzzy ranking — LPFN (I ψ, I ζ) with ψ²+ζ² ≤ τ²
Value Space
Linguistic pythagorean
Uncertainty
epistemic
Compensation
full
Rank Reversal
Yes
Related methods
EDAS
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