Table 11 Comparison analysis with existing method.

From: Development of a triangular Fermatean fuzzy EDAS model for remote patient monitoring applications

Proposed method

\({\tilde{\mathbf{\chi }}}_{1}\)

\({\tilde{\mathbf{\chi }}}_{2}\)

\({\tilde{\mathbf{\chi }}}_{3}\)

\({\tilde{\mathbf{\chi }}}_{4}\)

\({\tilde{\mathbf{\chi }}}_{5}\)

EDAS method

0.4938

0.6455

0.8199

0.9159

0

TFFSWWA operator

0.9880

1.1880

1.1914

1.3485

0.6140

Other method

TOPSIS method10

0.3206

0.3249

0.4492

0.5484

0.1594

GRA method79

0.4412

0.4495

0.5146

0.5238

0.3718

CoCoSo method80

2.0788

2.2353

2.2723

2.3973

1.5971

ELECTRE method81

0.5600

0.4932

0.3456

0.6754

0.4532

WASPAS method82

0.6057

0.8945

0.4505

0.9265

0.5908

Other operator

FFDWA operator46

1.0450

1.5988

1.5961

1.7228

0.7437

FFYWA operator44

1.0016

1.3055

1.3136

1.4146

0.6701

FFAAWA operator83

1.0202

1.4746

1.4609

1.6157

0.7099

Back to article page