An Evidential Linguistic CoCoSo Method for Early Warning System Technology Selection: A Risk-Aware Emergency Decision-Making Approach

Abstract

Early warning systems play a crucial role in disaster risk reduction by enabling timely detection and response to natural hazards. However, the selection of appropriate technologies for early warning systems faces significant challenges, including uncertainty in expert evaluations, incomplete information expression, and subjective preferences that can compromise decision quality. To address these challenges in early warning system development, this study proposed an improved evidential linguistic CoCoSo method for technology selection in emergency contexts. The proposed improved evidential linguistic term set reduces computational complexity while better reflecting real-world decision-making scenarios encountered in early warning system implementation. Recognizing that experts’ risk attitudes significantly influence technology selection decisions, a risk coefficient is introduced to calibrate expert evaluations and minimize the impact of subjective preferences on early warning system design choices. To capture information conflicts among experts during the technology assessment process, a novel evidence distance measure incorporating experts’ hesitation degrees is developed, leading to a reliability-based information fusion model. The evidential linguistic CoCoSo method is then applied to support systematic technology selection for early warning systems. The effectiveness of the proposed approach is demonstrated through a case study involving the selection of technical alternatives for a multi-hazard early warning system in Sichuan Province, China. The results show that the method provides robust and effective decision support for early warning system technology selection, offering valuable technical guidance for emergency managers and stakeholders involved in early warning system development and implementation.

Keywords

CoCoSo method / Dempster–Shafer theory / Early warning / Evidential linguistic term set / Risk attitude

References

[1] Aguirre-Ayerbe, I., M. Merino, S.L. Aye, R. Dissanayake, F. Shadiya, and C.M. Lopez. 2020. An evaluation of availability and adequacy of multi-hazard early warning systems in Asian countries: A baseline study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 49: Article 101749.

[2] Ahadi, P., F. Fakhrabadi, A. Pourshaghaghy, and F. Kowsary. 2023. Optimal site selection for a solar power plant in Iran via the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Renewable Energy 215: Article 118944.

[3] Akram, M., K. Zahid, and C. Kahraman. 2024. A new ELECTRE-based decision-making framework with spherical fuzzy information for the implementation of autonomous vehicles project in Istanbul. Knowledge-Based Systems 283: Article 111207.

[4] Bihari, R., S. Jeevaraj, and A. Kumar. 2024. Complete ranking for generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers and its application in supplier selection using the GTrF- CoCoSo approach. Expert Systems with Applications 255: Article 124612.

[5] Bouchet, A., M. Sesma-Sara, G. Ochoa, H. Bustince, S. Montes, and I. Díaz. 2023. Measures of embedding for interval-valued fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 467: Article 108505.

[6] Boult, V.L., E. Black, H.S. Abdillahi, M. Bailey, C. Harris, M. Kilavi, D. Kniveton, D. MacLeod, et al. 2022. Towards drought impact-based forecasting in a multi-hazard context. Climate Risk Management 35: Article 100402.

[7] Casagli N, Intrieri E, Tofani V, Gigli G, Raspini F. Landslide detection, monitoring and prediction with remote-sensing techniques. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 2023, 4(1): 51-64

[8] Chakraborty S, Chatterjee P, Das PP. Chakraborty S, Chatterjee P, Das PP. Combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method. Multi-criteria decision-making methods in manufacturing environments, 2024, New York, Apple Academic Press309315

[9] Chen L, Li Z, Deng X. Emergency alternative evaluation under group decision makers: A new method based on entropy weight and DEMATEL. International Journal of Systems Science, 2020, 51(3): 570-583

[10] Chen, Q.Y., H.C. Liu, J.H. Wang, and H. Shi. 2022. New model for occupational health and safety risk assessment based on Fermatean fuzzy linguistic sets and CoCoSo approach. Applied Soft Computing 126: Article 109262.

[11] Chen, Z.H., D.F. Wu, and W. Luo. 2023. A hybrid emergency decision-making technique based on trapezoidal fuzzy best-worst method and zero-sum game. Expert Systems with Applications 234: Article 120990.

[12] de Oliveira, M.E.B., F.R. Lima-Junior, and N.R. Galo. 2023. A comparison of hesitant fuzzy VIKOR methods for supplier selection. Applied Soft Computing 149: Article 110920.

[13] Dempster AP. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1967, 38(2): 325-339

[14] Deng, Y. 2022. Random permutation set. International Journal of Computers Communications & Control 17(1): Article 4542.

[15] Ecer, F., H. Küçükönder, S.K. Kaya, and Ö.F. Görçün. 2023. Sustainability performance analysis of micro-mobility solutions in urban transportation with a novel IVFNN-Delphi-LOPCOW-CoCoSo framework. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 172: Article 103667.

[16] Fei L, Feng Y. Modeling interactive multiattribute decision-making via probabilistic linguistic term set extended by Dempster–Shafer theory. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2021, 23(2): 599-613

[17] Fei, L., and Y. Wang. 2022. An optimization model for rescuer assignments under an uncertain environment by using Dempster–Shafer theory. Knowledge-Based Systems 255: Article 109680.

[18] Fei, L., T. Li, and W. Ding. 2024. Dempster–Shafer theory-based information fusion for natural disaster emergency management: A systematic literature review. Information Fusion 112: Article 102585.

[19] Fei, L., X. Liu, and C. Zhang. 2024. An evidential linguistic ELECTRE method for selection of emergency shelter sites. Artificial Intelligence Review 57(4): Article 81.

[20] Fei, L., T. Li, and W. Ding. 2025. Adaptive multi-source information fusion for intelligent decision-making in emergencies: Integrating personal, event, and environmental factors. Information Fusion 125: Article 103512.

[21] Fu, S., X. L. Qu, Y.Z. Xiao, H.J. Zhou, and G.B. Fan. 2020. Risky multi-attribute decision-making method based on the interval number of normal distribution. Symmetry 12(2): Article 264.

[22] Girotto, C.D., F. Piadeh, V. Bkhtiari, K. Behzadian, A.S. Chen, L.C. Campos, and M. Zolgharni. 2024. A critical review of digital technology innovations for early warning of water-related disease outbreaks associated with climatic hazards. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 100: Article 104151.

[23] Haseli, G., S.R. Bonab, M. Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, S.J. Ghoushchi, and M. Deveci. 2024. Fuzzy ze-numbers framework in group decision-making using the BCM and CoCoSo to address sustainable urban transportation. Information Sciences 653: Article 119809.

[24] Jiang J, Ren M, Wang J. Interval number multi-attribute decision-making method based on TOPSIS. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 2022, 61(7): 5059-5064

[25] Jousselme AL, Grenier D, Bossé É. A new distance between two bodies of evidence. Information Fusion, 2001, 2(2): 91-101

[26] Kelman, I., and C.J. Fearnley. 2025. From multi-hazard early warning systems (MHEWS) to all-vulnerability warning systems (AVWS). iScience 28(7): Article 112977.

[27] Li, T., and L. Fei. 2025. Exploring obstacles to the use of unmanned aerial vehicles in emergency rescue: A BWM-DEMATEL approach. Technology in Society 81: Article 102863.

[28] Liang, D., Y. Fu, and H. Garg. 2024. A novel robustness PROMETHEE method by learning interactive criteria and historical information for blockchain technology-enhanced supplier selection. Expert Systems with Applications 235: Article 121107.

[29] Na, Z., Ž. Stević, M. Subotić, D.K. Das, G. Kou, and S. Moslem. 2024. A novel interval rough model for optimizing road network performance and safety. Expert Systems with Applications 255: Article 124844.

[30] Najera, J.Z., C.C. Luna, and J.J.V. Upegui. 2024. Performance assessment of indicators of a multi-hazards early warning system in an urban mountain region. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 112: Article 104767.

[31] Niu W, Rong Y, Yu L. An integrated group decision support framework utilizing Pythagorean fuzzy DEMATEL-CoCoSo approach for medicine cold chain logistics provider selection. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2024, 37(6): 1809-1838

[32] Pang Q, Wang H, Xu Z. Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Information Sciences, 2016, 369: 128-143

[33] Riaz, K., M. McAfee, and S.S. Gharbia. 2023. Management of climate resilience: Exploring the potential of digital twin technology, 3d city modelling, and early warning systems. Sensors 23(5): Article 2659.

[34] Rodriguez RM, Martinez L, Herrera F. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2011, 20(1): 109-119

[35] Rokhideh M, Fearnley C, Budimir M. Multi-hazard early warning systems in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction: Achievements, gaps, and future directions. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2025, 16(1): 103-116

[36] Shafer G. A mathematical theory of evidence, 1976, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press

[37] Shen F, Ma X, Li Z, Xu Z, Cai D. An extended intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method based on a new distance measure with an application to credit risk evaluation. Information Sciences, 2018, 428: 105-119

[38] Siam, M.R.K., M.K. Lindell, and H. Wang. 2024. Modeling of multi-hazard warning dissemination time distributions: An agent-based approach. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 100: Article 104207.

[39] Torkayesh, A.E., F. Ecer, D. Pamucar, and Ç. Karamaşa. 2021. Comparative assessment of social sustainability performance: Integrated data-driven weighting system and CoCoSo model. Sustainable Cities and Society 71: Article 102975.

[40] UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2016. Report of the open-ended intergovernmental expert working group on indicators and terminology relating to disaster risk reduction. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/50683_oiewgreportenglish.pdf. Accessed 30 Aug 2025.

[41] Wang YM. Using the method of maximizing deviation to make decision for multiindices. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 1997, 8(3): 21-26

[42] Xiao F. Caftr: A fuzzy complex event processing method. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2022, 24(2): 1098-1111

[43] Xin, G., and L. Ying. 2024. Multi-attribute decision-making based on comprehensive hesitant fuzzy entropy. Expert Systems with Applications 237: Article 121459.

[44] Yager RR. Golden rule and other representative values for Atanassov type intuitionistic membership grades. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2015, 23(6): 2260-2269

[45] Yang, Y.D., and X.F. Ding. 2023. Emergency response scheme selection with T-spherical hesitant probabilistic fuzzy TODIM-TPZSG approach. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 123: Article 106190.

[46] Ye, Z., Y. Ye, C. Zhang, Z. Zhang, W. Li, X. Wang, L. Wang, and L. Wang. 2023. A digital twin approach for tunnel construction safety early warning and management. Computers in Industry 144: Article 103783.

[47] Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 1965, 8(3): 338-353

[48] Zeng, S., N. Zhang, C. Zhang, W. Su, and L.A. Carlos. 2022. Social network multiple-criteria decision-making approach for evaluating unmanned ground delivery vehicles under the Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 175: Article 121414.

[49] Zhang X, Chen X, Xu W, Ding W. Dynamic information fusion in multi-source incomplete interval-valued information system with variation of information sources and attributes. Information Sciences, 2022, 608: 1-27

[50] Zhang, X., X. Huang, and W. Xu. 2023. Matrix-based multi-granulation fusion approach for dynamic updating of knowledge in multi-source information. Knowledge-Based Systems 262: Article 110257.

[51] Zhao, Y., N. Jiang, Y. He, and X. Deng. 2025. Entropy measures of multigranular unbalanced hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for multiple criteria decision making. Information Sciences 686: Article 121346.

[52] Zhong X, Xu X, Chen X, Goh M. Large group decision-making incorporating decision risk and risk attitude: A statistical approach. Information Sciences, 2020, 533: 120-137

[53] Zhou, X., W. Tan, Y. Sun, T. Huang, and C. Yang. 2024. Multi-objective optimization and decision making for integrated energy system using STA and fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert Systems with Applications 240: Article 122539.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s)