Table 6 Ranking of alternatives.

From: Evaluating generative AI tools for visual communication design using the CoCoSo method under interval valued spherical fuzzy environment

 

Ƥ

\(\:{\mathbbm{k}}_{\varvec{i}\varvec{a}}\)

\(\:{\mathbbm{k}}_{\varvec{i}\varvec{b}}\)

\(\:{\mathbbm{k}}_{\varvec{i}\varvec{c}}\)

\(\:{\mathbbm{k}}_{\varvec{i}}\)

Rank

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{1}\)

\(\:5.35\)

\(\:0.38\)

\(\:0.10\)

\(\:2.46\)

\(\:0.84\)

\(\:1.72\)

\(\:6\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{2}\)

\(\:4.90\)

\(\:0.35\)

\(\:0.09\)

\(\:2.28\)

\(\:0.77\)

\(\:1.59\)

\(\:9\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{3}\)

\(\:5.73\)

\(\:0.37\)

\(\:0.11\)

\(\:2.53\)

\(\:0.90\)

\(\:1.80\)

\(\:5\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{4}\)

\(\:4.00\)

\(\:0.41\)

\(\:0.08\)

\(\:2.23\)

\(\:0.65\)

\(\:1.46\)

\(\:10\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{5}\)

\(\:4.94\)

\(\:0.44\)

\(\:0.09\)

\(\:2.54\)

\(\:0.79\)

\(\:1.71\)

\(\:7\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{6}\)

\(\:5.56\)

\(\:0.54\)

\(\:0.11\)

\(\:3.01\)

\(\:0.90\)

\(\:2.00\)

\(\:3\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{7}\)

\(\:6.25\)

\(\:0.52\)

\(\:0.12\)

\(\:3.12\)

\(\:1.00\)

\(\:2.12\)

\(\:1\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{8}\)

\(\:6.21\)

\(\:0.45\)

\(\:0.11\)

\(\:2.90\)

\(\:0.98\)

\(\:2.02\)

\(\:2\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{9}\)

\(\:5.14\)

\(\:0.34\)

\(\:0.09\)

\(\:2.28\)

\(\:0.81\)

\(\:1.62\)

\(\:8\)

\(\:{\varvec{A}}_{10}\)

\(\:5.63\)

\(\:0.53\)

\(\:0.11\)

\(\:2.99\)

\(\:0.91\)

\(\:2.00\)

\(\:4\)