An Investment Framework for Multi-Energy Complementary System Based on the Pythagorean Fuzzy Prospect-GLDS Model

Abstract

Multi-Energy Complementary Systems (MECS) are integrated energy systems that incorporate renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, combined with energy storage and conversion technologies. They aim to enhance energy utilization efficiency and ensure supply stability through synergistic optimization. Scientific investment decision-making is crucial for the low-carbon transition of regional energy systems. However, MECS investments face challenges such as high uncertainties and the fuzziness of expert evaluations. To address this question, this paper proposes a multi-criteria decisionmaking (MCDM) framework integrated with fuzzy theory. An evaluation system is constructed, which includes five dimensions: resources, economy, environment, society, and infrastructure. The Choquet integral is employed to handle resource indicators, Pythagorean fuzzy sets (PFS) are introduced to process qualitative evaluations, and a combined weighting approach integrating Fuzzy Weighting with Zero-Inconsistency (FWZIC) and Weights by Envelope and Slope (WENSLO) is utilized to determine criteria weights. Finally, prospect theory is fused with the Gained and Lost Dominance Score (GLDS) method for alternative ranking. An empirical study on MECS investment in Hebei Province, China, is conducted. The results indicate that the economic dimension exerts the most significant influence, and the Chengde Weichang project demonstrates the optimal comprehensive benefits. This research provides methodological references and a practical basis for MECS investment decision-making and regional energy optimization.

Keywords

Multi-energy complementary system (MECS) / Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) / Investment decision-making / GLDS method

Statement of the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process

During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used generative AI tools to assist with language polishing and format organization. After using the tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the published article.

Author Contributions

Q.M.: Supervision, Project administration, Investigation, Conceptualization. F.D.: Writing—review & editing, Writing—original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Resources, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation. X.Y.: Validation, Supervision, Conceptualization, Writing—review & editing. G.D.: Validation, Supervision, Writing—review & editing.

Ethics Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

[1] Hua H, Du C, Chen X, Kong H, Li K, Liu Z, et al. Optimal dispatch of multiple interconnected-integrated energy systems considering multi-energy interaction and aggregated demand response for multiple stakeholders. Appl. Energy 2024, 376, 124256. DOI:10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.124256

[2] Quizhpe K, Arévalo P, Ochoa-Correa D, Villa-Ávila E. Optimizing Microgrid Planning for Renewable Integration in Power Systems: A Comprehensive Review. Electronics 2024, 13, 3620. DOI:10.3390/electronics13183620

[3] Wang J, Cui Y, Liu Z, Zeng L, Yue C, Agbodjan YS. Multi-energy complementary integrated energy system optimization with electric vehicle participation considering uncertainties. Energy 2024, 309, 133109. DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2024.133109

[4] Wu Y, Wu C, Zhou J, He F, Xu C, Zhang B, et al. An investment decision framework for photovoltaic power coupling hydrogen storage project based on a mixed evaluation method under intuitionistic fuzzy environment. J. Energy Storage 2020, 30, 101601. DOI:10.1016/j.est.2020.101601

[5] Liu Z, Cui Y, Wang J, Yue C, Agbodjan YS, Yang Y. Multi-objective optimization of multi-energy complementary integrated energy systems considering load prediction and renewable energy production uncertainties. Energy 2022, 254, 124399. DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2022.124399

[6] Lin J, Gu Y, Wang Z, Zhao Z, Zhu P. Operational characteristics of an integrated island energy system based on multienergy complementarity. Renew. Energy 2024, 230, 120890. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2024.120890

[7] Wei D, Zhang Y, Li J, Yuan S, Geng Y, Cheng Y, et al. Research and Application of Multi-energy Complementary Comprehensive Energy Distributed Measurement and Control System. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 510, 022036. DOI:10.1088/1755-1315/510/2/022036

[8] Arévalo P, Cano A, Jurado F.Large-scale integration of renewable energies by 2050 through demand prediction with ANFIS, Ecuador case study. Energy 2024, 286, 129446. DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2023.129446

[9] Lin X, Zhang N, Zhong W, Kong F, Cong F. Regional integrated energy system long-term planning optimization based on multi-energy complementarity quantification. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 68, 106046. DOI:10.1016/j.jobe.2023.106046

[10] Liu C, Wang H, Wang Z, Liu Z, Tang Y, Yang S. Research on life cycle low carbon optimization method of multi-energy complementary distributed energy system: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 336, 130380. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130380

[11] Zhao G, Yu C, Huang H, Yu Y, Zou L, Mo L. Optimization Scheduling of Hydro-Wind-Solar Multi-Energy Complementary Systems Based on an Improved Enterprise Development Algorithm. Sustainability 2025, 17, 2691. DOI:10.3390/su17062691

[12] Jing Z, Wang Y, Chang J, Wang X, Guo A, Meng X. Hydro-wind-PV-storage complementary operation based on a multivariate 3D power generation database considering comprehensive utilization tasks of cascade hydropower stations in the river basin. Energy 2025, 322, 135672. DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2025.135672

[13] Ma Y, Yu L, Zhang G, Lu Z, Wu J. Source-load uncertainty-based multi-objective multi-energy complementary optimal scheduling. Renew. Energy 2023, 219, 119483. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2023.119483

[14] Wang Y, Gao J, Wei L, Wu H, Zhao S. Geographic information system-based multi-criteria decision-making analysis for investment assessment of wind-photovoltaic-shared energy storage power stations: a case study of Shanxi Province. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2024, 31, 22604-22629. DOI:10.1007/s11356-024-32123-5

[15] Li W, Dong F, Shi M, Wang X, Ji Z. Multi-attribute decision-making research on investment suitability assessment of hydropower-wind-photovoltaic-storage complementary system based on dynamic social network. Energy Convers. Manag. 2024, 307, 118358. DOI:10.1016/j.enconman.2024.118358

[16] Guo F, Gao J, Liu H, He P. A hybrid fuzzy investment assessment framework for offshore wind-photovoltaic-hydrogen storage project. J. Energy Storage 2022, 45, 103757. DOI:10.1016/j.est.2021.103757

[17] Arévalo P, Benavides D, Lata‐García J, Jurado F. Techno-economic evaluation of renewable energy systems combining PV-WT-HKT sources: Effects of energy management under Ecuadorian conditions. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2020, 30, e12567. DOI:10.1002/2050-7038.12567

[18] Mao Q, Fan J, Imtiaz S, Mudassir Munir H, Alsenani TR, Alharbi M. Prioritization of renewable energy for offshore ship charging stations based on intuitionistic fuzzy GLDS method: A case of China. Heliyon 2024, 10, e36530. DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36530

[19] Ziadi K, Barakat A, Elaloui A, Ouayah M, Namous M. Prioritization of the Tassaoute Watershed (Morocco) for soil erosion using analytical hierarchy process (AHP) and geospatial techniques. Geosyst. Geoenviron. 2025, 4, 100389. DOI:10.1016/j.geogeo.2025.100389

[20] Oraya AF, Canseco-Tuñacao HA, Luciano R, Patadlas A, Baguio I, Aro JL, et al. An Integrated Multi-criteria Sorting Methodology withq -Rung Orthopair Fuzzy Sets for Evaluating the Impacts of Delays on Residential Construction Projects. Axioms 2023, 12, 735. DOI:10.3390/axioms12080735

[21] Ogundoyin SO, Kamil IA. An integrated Fuzzy-BWM, Fuzzy-LBWA and V-Fuzzy-CoCoSo-LD model for gateway selection in fog-bolstered Internet of Things. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 2023, 143, 110393. DOI:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110393

[22] Feng X, Zibibula M, Wei C. Evaluation of dynamic technological innovation capability in high-tech enterprises based on pythagorean fuzzy LBWA and MULTIMOORA. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2023, 44, 9143-9165. DOI:10.3233/JIFS-222965

[23] Ara MA, Sultana M, Mou SS, Sakib MSA, Shabur MA. Assessing the obstacles to green supply chain management in Bangladesh’s footwear industry using SWARA and ISM-MICMAC methods. Discov. Sustain. 2024, 5, 463. DOI:10.1007/s43621-024-00657-w

[24] Sithi SS, Ara MA, Dhrubo AT, Rony AH, Shabur MA. Sustainable supplier selection in the textile industry using triple bottom line and SWARA-TOPSIS approaches. Discov. Sustain. 2025, 6, 344. DOI:10.1007/s43621-025-01206-9

[25] Yazdanirad S, Shakerian M, Khoshakhlagh AH, Rafiei A, Mousavi SM. Identification, classification, and prioritization of the main risk factors of work-related musculoskeletal disorders using the hybrid SWARA-PROMETHEE method. WORK A J. Prev. Assess. Rehabil. 2025, 81, 3151-3161. DOI:10.1177/10519815251324004

[26] Derse O. Prioritizing solutions of green Reverse logistics barriers with Fuzzy DEMATEL—FUCOM—SWARA methods. Ecol. Indic. 2024, 165, 112198. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112198

[27] Gan Y, Zheng C, Chu B, Li J, Zhang Y, Jia Y. Research on the risk assessment of the power grid enterprises’ agency power purchase business in China: A hybrid multi-attribute decision-making framework based on FUCOM-F and GRA-MARCOS. Front. Energy Res. 2024, 12, 1376531. DOI:10.3389/fenrg.2024.1376531

[28] Hatice Gökler S. Optimal site selection for electric vehicle charging stations: Analysis with hybrid FUCOM and geographic information systems. Energy 2024, 307, 132659. DOI:10.1016/j.energy.2024.132659

[29] Albahri AS, Hamid RA, Alzubaidi L, Homod RZ, Zidan KA, Mubark H, et al. Prioritizing complex health levels beyond autism triage using fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making. Complex Intell. Syst. 2024, 10, 6159-6188. DOI:10.1007/s40747-024-01432-0

[30] Taha Aljburi M, Albahri AS, Albahri OS, Alamoodi AH, Mahdi Mohammed S, Deveci M, et al. Exploring decision-making techniques for evaluation and benchmarking of energy system integration frameworks for achieving a sustainable energy future. Energy Strategy Rev. 2024, 51, 101251. DOI:10.1016/j.esr.2023.101251

[31] Xiao L, Fang T, Huang G, Deveci M. An integrated design concept evaluation method based on fuzzy weighted zero inconsistency and combined compromise solution considering inherent uncertainties. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2025, 65, 103097. DOI:10.1016/j.aei.2024.103097

[32] Hantoobi SA, Zaidan AA, Ibrahim HA, Qahtan S, Deveci M, Isik S, et al. Security modules of delegation methods in mobile cloud computing using probabilistic interval neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy set based decision-making model. Appl. Soft Comput. 2025, 175, 113089. DOI:10.1016/j.asoc.2025.113089

[33] Al-Hchaim AAJ, Muhsen YR, Gwad WH, Alkayal ES, Ogaili RRNA, Alyasseri ZAA, et al. Prioritizing Network-On-Chip Routers for Countermeasure Techniques against Flooding Denial-of-Service Attacks: A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 2025, 142, 2661-2689. DOI:10.32604/cmes.2025.061318

[34] Bilquise G, Ibrahim S. Integrating ARAS with PyFWZIC to evaluate and benchmark patient-facing genetic services digital tools. Neural Comput. Appl. 2024, 36, 18201-18222. DOI:10.1007/s00521-024-10153-x

[35] Zhu Y, Guo Y, Chen Y, Ma J, Zhang D. Factors Influencing Carbon Emission and Low-Carbon Development Levels in Shandong Province: Method Analysis Based on Improved Random Forest Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Model and Entropy Weight Method. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8488. DOI:10.3390/su16198488

[36] Sun L, Chen B, Zhou Q, Zhao D. Multi-objective optimization of wire cutting process parameters for Ti-6Al-4V alloy is performed using NSGA-II and EWM-TOPSIS optimized artificial neural network. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 2025, 239, 3772-3789. DOI:10.1177/09544062251315035

[37] Zhang Q, Ge D, Mi S, Lu Q. An eco-friendly and effective method for isolating essential oil from fresh Kaempferia galanga L.: Process optimization based on entropy weight method and response surface methodology. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 2025, 45, 102042. DOI:10.1016/j.scp.2025.102042

[38] Salaj, Kumari M. A multi-criteria approach to blockchain in supply chain management assessment: Entropy-CRITIC weight method and MCDM for enhanced decision support. Int. J. Syst. Assur. Eng. Manag. 2025, 16, 1830-1843. DOI:10.1007/s13198-025-02764-x

[39] Shahzadi G, Sarwar M, Riasat A. Hybrid decision making model for COVID-19 effects: A (p, q)-rung orthopair fuzzy integrated CRITIC-DEMATEL-MABAC approach. Afr. Mat. 2025, 36, 109. DOI:10.1007/s13370-025-01330-9

[40] Song S, Meng A, Xiao L, Tan Z, Zou P, Yin H, et al. Research on data augmentation and synthetic sample quantity uncertainty in few-shot wind power prediction based on the adaptive CRITIC-HLICRVFL method. Renew. Energy 2025, 252, 123527. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2025.123527

[41] Liang X. MEREC-Based Combined Framework for Multiple-Attribute Group Decision-Making in Probabilistic Linguistic Environment: Applications to Technology Finance Development Efficiency Evaluation. Int. J. Decis. Support Syst. Technol. 2024, 16, 1-18. DOI:10.4018/IJDSST.361906

[42] Kou G, Aydın FB, Eti S, Yüksel S, Dinçer H. A novel Spherical fuzzy MEREC-ARAS decision framework for optimizing innovation-driven investment strategies in energy systems. Energy Strategy Rev. 2025, 59, 101771. DOI:10.1016/j.esr.2025.101771

[43] Seikh MR, Chatterjee P. Sustainable strategies for electric vehicle adoption: A confidence level-based interval-valued spherical fuzzy MEREC-VIKOR approach. Inf. Sci. 2025, 699, 121814. DOI:10.1016/j.ins.2024.121814

[44] Riaz M, Qamar F, Tariq S, Alsager K. AI-Driven LOPCOW-AROMAN Framework and Topological Data Analysis Using Circular Intuitionistic Fuzzy Information: Healthcare Supply Chain Innovation. Mathematics 2024, 12, 3593. DOI:10.3390/math12223593

[45] Dhruva S, Krishankumar R, Zavadskas EK, Ravichandran KS, Gandomi AH. Selection of Suitable Cloud Vendors for Health Centre: A Personalized Decision Framework with Fermatean Fuzzy Set, LOPCOW, and CoCoSo. Informatica 2024, 35, 65-98. DOI:10.15388/23-INFOR537

[46] Ecer F, Tanrıverdi G, Yaşar M, Görçün ÖF. Sustainable aviation fuel supplier evaluation for airlines through LOPCOW and MARCOS approaches with interval-valued fuzzy neutrosophic information. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2025, 123, 102705. DOI:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2024.102705

[47] Pamucar D, Ecer F, Gligorić Z, Gligorić M, Deveci M. A Novel WENSLO and ALWAS Multi-criteria Methodology and Its Application to Green Growth Performance Evaluation. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2024, 71, 9510-9525. DOI:10.1109/TEM.2023.3321697

[48] Kara K, Yalçın GC, Akagün Ergin E, Simic V, Pamucar D. A neutrosophic WENSLO-ARLON model for measuring sustainable brand equity performance. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2024, 94, 101918. DOI:10.1016/j.seps.2024.101918

[49] Kara K, Akagün Ergin E, Cihan Yalçın G, Çelik T, Deveci M, Kadry S. Sustainable brand logo selection using an AISupported PF-WENSLO-ARLON hybrid method. Expert Syst. Appl. 2025, 260, 125382. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125382

[50] Sánchez-Lozano JM, Ramos-Escudero A, Gil-García IC, García-Cascales MS, Molina-García A. A GIS-based offshore wind site selection model using fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making with application to the case of the Gulf of Maine. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 210, 118371. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118371

[51] Baral SP, Parida PK, Sahoo D. Fuzzy TOPSIS technique for multi-criteria group decision-making: A study of crude oil price. Results Control Optim. 2025, 19, 100565. DOI:10.1016/j.rico.2025.100565

[52] Ding Y, Jing X, Xie F, Chen S, Zhang C, Zhao G, et al. TOPSIS analysis and failure mechanism of low-velocity impact behavior of S-glass/aramid fiber reinforced hybrid composite laminates. Thin-Walled Struct. 2025, 215, 113489. DOI:10.1016/j.tws.2025.113489

[53] Hendiani S, Torkayesh AE, Venghaus S, Walther G. Leading the green charge: A novel type-2 fuzzy VIKOR method applied to eco-conscious freight transport. Expert Syst. Appl. 2025, 285, 128082. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.128082

[54] Ma Y, Zhi G, Alfarraj O, Alblehai F, Yu J. Hybrid AHP-VIKOR methodology for multi-criteria decision-making in marine renewable energy systems: Optimizing DC-DC buck converters for sustainable offshore applications. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2025, 214, 117809. DOI:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.117809

[55] Debnath K, Roy SK, Deveci M, Tomášková H. Integrated MADM approach based on extended MABAC method with Aczel-Alsina generalized weighted Bonferroni mean operator. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2024, 58, 27. DOI:10.1007/s10462-024-10980-3

[56] Ahmmad J, Al-Dayel OA, Khan MA, Mahmood T. AI-assisted technology optimization in disability support systems using fuzzy rough MABAC decision-making. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 18335. DOI:10.1038/s41598-025-02362-8

[57] Aydin M, Camliyurt G, Gul M, Sezer SI, Celik E, Akyuz E. An interval type-2 fuzzy MARCOS modelling to assess performance effectiveness of survival craft on cargo ship. Ocean Eng. 2025, 326, 120899. DOI:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.120899

[58] Santhiya P, Das A. A novel bipolar hexagonal fuzzy MARCOS method for warehouse selection to e-waste recycling in a mass quantity. Expert Syst. Appl. 2025, 283, 127667. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127667

[59] Wang X, Gou X, Xu Z. A continuous interval-valued double hierarchy linguistic GLDS method and its application in performance evaluation of bus companies. Appl. Intell. 2021, 52, 4511-4526. DOI:10.1007/s10489-021-02581-2

[60] Wu X, Liao H. A consensus-based probabilistic linguistic gained and lost dominance score method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019, 272, 1017-1027. DOI:10.1016/j.ejor.2018.07.044

[61] Zhang Z, Liao H. Emergency response determination by a choquet-integral-based hybrid gained and lost dominance score method with incomplete attribute weight information. Transform. Bus. Econ. 2022, 21, 290-312. Available online: accessed on 27 March 2026).

[62] Hong N, Wang X, Xu Z. Probabilistic reliable linguistic term sets applied to investment project selection with the gained and lost dominance score method. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. 2021, 12, 2163-2183. DOI:10.1007/s13042-021-01299-4

[63] Liang X, Wu X, Liao H. A gained and lost dominance score II method for modelling group uncertainty: Case study of site selection of electric vehicle charging stations. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 262, 121239. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121239

[64] Ming Y, Luo L, Wu X, Liao H, Lev B, Jiang L. Managing patient satisfaction in a blood-collection room by the probabilistic linguistic gained and lost dominance score method integrated with the best-worst method. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 145, 106547. DOI:10.1016/j.cie.2020.106547

[65] Jiang J, Liu X, Wang W, Deveci M. Assessing the impact of healthcare service risks on healthcare demand under evolving economic and social structures: An improved GLDS decision making method considering risk attitudes. Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 2023, 67, 459-479. DOI:10.1016/j.strueco.2023.09.002

[66] Wu M, Ma S, Fan J. A spherical Z-number multi-attribute group decision making model based on the prospect theory and GLDS method. Complex Intell. Syst. 2024, 10, 8501-8524. DOI:10.1007/s40747-024-01552-7

[67] Zhan M, Li YL. Risk evaluation of submarine pipelines using improved FMEA model based on social network analysis and extended GLDS method under a linguistic Z-number preference relation environment. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2025, 96, 105611. DOI:10.1016/j.jlp.2025.105611

[68] Tian G, Chen X, Chen C, Yang Y, Li J, Zhang Y. Multi-scenario investment forecast of new energy projects based on multiple linear regression and comprehensive evaluation model of differentiated project priorities. Heliyon 2024, 10, e23771. DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23771

[69] Yager RR. Pythagorean Membership Grades in Multi-criteria Decision Making. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2014, 22, 958-965. DOI:10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2278989

[70] Zhang X, Xu Z. Extension of TOPSIS to Multiple Criteria Decision Making with Pythagorean Fuzzy Sets. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2014, 29, 1061-1078. DOI:10.1002/int.21676

[71] Yager RR, Abbasov AM.Pythagorean Membership Grades, Complex Numbers, and Decision Making. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2013, 28, 436-452. DOI:10.1002/int.21584

[72] Wang J, An N. Research on Evaluation Method of Green Suppliers Under Pythagorean Fuzzy Environment. Sustainability 2024, 16, 9124. DOI:10.3390/su16209124

[73] Liang D, Xu Z, Liu D, Wu Y. Method for three-way decisions using ideal TOPSIS solutions at Pythagorean fuzzy information. Inf. Sci. 2018, 435, 282-295. DOI:10.1016/j.ins.2018.01.015

[74] Ortiz Y, Arévalo P, Peña D, Jurado F. Recent Advances in Thermal Management Strategies for Lithium-Ion Batteries: A Comprehensive Review. Batteries 2024, 10, 83. DOI:10.3390/batteries10030083