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›m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS
MCDMRankinghesitant

m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS

MHF-TOPSIS (m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS) is a ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Akram, M., Adeel, A., Alcantud, J.C.R. in 2019. 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.

MHF-TOPSIS
AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC

When to use it

MHF-TOPSIS (Akram et al. 2019) extends classical TOPSIS to m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM). Each cell of the decision matrix is an m-tuple of HFEs, one per pole/sub-feature of the criterion; the m poles are independent (no DHF-style γ⁺+η⁺ constraint). The DM-chosen prolongation_mode (optimistic = repeat max, pessimistic = repeat min) equalises pole-HFE lengths to a common r. Weighting is literal scalar multiplication (H′ = w·H). Ideals mHP_IS and mHN_IS are pole-wise column extrema on the weighted matrix; distances average over q criteria × m poles × r posit

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., Adeel, A., Alcantud, J.C.R. (2019). Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making Using an m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach. Symmetry DOI: 10.3390/sym11060795 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 2). m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/mhf-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

MPF-HF-TOPSISSNHF-TOPSISMPF-ELECTRE-IIMPF-TOPSIS-LINGDHF-TOPSISMPF-PROMETHEEBF-WASPASPHF-TOPSIS

Related reference concepts

Decision Support SystemsDecision MakingCriteria for Decision-Making under Risk and UncertaintyDecision Making SkillsEvaluation CriteriaMultidimensional Scaling

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

ScholarGate — MHF-TOPSIS (m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy extension of TOPSIS). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/mhf-topsis · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Akram, M., Adeel, A., Alcantud, J.C.R.
Subfamily
Ranking
Year
2019
Type
M-Polar Hesitant outranking/ranking — m-Polar Hesitant Fuzzy Element (mHFE: m-tuple of HFEs, ℏ m: Z → P([0,1]^m))
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