{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020043336944745395, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.692028985507246, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Hybridizations of generalized Dombi operators and Bonferroni mean operators under dual probabilistic linguistic environment for group decision‐making

The dual probabilistic linguistic (DPL) term sets are considered superior to probabilistic linguistic term sets. Further, the generalized Dombi (GD) operators are pretty flexible with the general parameters during the aggregation process. Besides, the Bonferroni mean (BM) operator has the advantage of considering interrelationships between criteria. In this study, we combine the merits of the GD operator, and BM operator for handling multicriteria group decision‐making issues under a DPL setting. The existing research on DPL term sets do not focus on both the subjective and objective weights of decision‐experts. As a result, the evaluation results are likely to be distorted. To tackle this situation, in this paper, we utilize the concepts of consistency and similarity between the decision‐experts to determine the decision‐experts subjective and objective weights, respectively. To calculate the weights of criteria, the grey correlation coefficient of the assessment value of criteria is used to reflect the similarity between the criteria and its reference value. Since the existing aggregation operators fail to capture the interrelations between criteria under DPL setting, so for aggregating criteria values, we propose DPL generalized Dombi BM weighted averaging and geometric aggregation operators. We provide a case study regarding biomass feedstock selection to focus on the applicability of these proposed operators. Furthermore, we investigate the effects of the parameters upon ranking order. We also perform a sensitivity assessment of criteria weights to test the stability of our method. Lastly, we provide a comparison between our approach with various extant methods.