Evaluation of trustworthy artificial intelligent healthcare applications using multi-criteria decision-making approach

被引:14
作者
Alsalem, M. A. [1 ]
Alamoodi, A. H. [8 ,9 ]
Albahri, O. S. [2 ,4 ]
Albahri, A. S. [3 ,4 ]
Martinez, Luis [5 ]
Yera, R. [5 ]
Duhaim, Ali M. [6 ]
Sharaf, Iman Mohamad [7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Mosul, Coll Adm & Econ, Dept Management Informat Syst, Mosul, Iraq
[2] Victorian Inst Technol, Sydney, Australia
[3] Imam Jaafar Al Sadiq Univ, Tech Coll, Baghdad, Iraq
[4] Iraqi Commiss Comp & Informat ICCI, Baghdad, Iraq
[5] Univ Jaen, Dept Comp Sci, Jaen 23071, Spain
[6] Minist Educ, Thi Qar Educ Directorate, Nasiriyah, Iraq
[7] Higher Technol Inst, Dept Basic Sci, Tenth Of Ramadan City, Egypt
[8] AL Ahliyya Amman Univ, Hourani Ctr Appl Sci Res, Amman 19328, Jordan
[9] Univ Tenaga Nas, Inst Informat & Comp Energy, Coll Comp & Informat, Dept Comp, Kajang 43000, Malaysia
关键词
Trustworthy; Artificial intelligence; q-ROF2TL-FWZIC; q-ROF2TL-CODAS; Multi -attribute decision -making; BLOCKCHAIN; FUSION; MODEL; AI; METHODOLOGY; RELIABILITY; SELECTION; MEDICINE; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.eswa.2023.123066
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
The purpose of this paper is to propose a novel hybrid framework for evaluating and benchmarking trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare by using multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques under a new fuzzy environment. To develop such a framework, a new decision matrix has been built, and then integrated with q-ROF2TL-FWZIC (q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy 2-Tuple Linguistic Fuzzy-Weighted Zero-Inconsistency) and q-ROF2TL-CODAS (q-Rung Orthopair Fuzzy 2-Tuple Linguistic Combinative Distance-Based Assessment). In this integration, q-ROF2TL-FWZIC is utilized for assigning the weights of evaluation attributes of trustworthy AI, while q-ROF2TL-CODAS is employed for benchmarking trustworthy AI applications. Findings show that the q-ROF2TL-FWZIC method effectively weights the evaluation attributes. The transparency attribute receives the highest importance weight (0.173566825), whereas the human agency and oversight criterion has the lowest weight (0.105741901). The remaining attributes are distributed in between. Moreover, alternative_4 receives the highest rank order (score of 7.370410417), while alternative_13 receives the lowest rank order (score of -4.759794397). To evaluate the validity of the proposed framework, systematic ranking and sensitivity analysis assessments were employed.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Identification of Road Crash Severity Ranking by Integrating the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach
    Trivedi, Priyank
    Shah, Jiten
    JOURNAL OF ROAD SAFETY-JRS, 2022, 33 (02): : 33 - 44
  • [42] Linguistic multi-criteria decision-making with representing semantics by programming
    Yang, Wu-E
    Ma, Chao-Qun
    Han, Zhi-Qiu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS SCIENCE, 2017, 48 (02) : 225 - 235
  • [43] Site selection for offshore renewable energy platforms: A multi-criteria decision-making approach
    Bao, Minghan
    Arzaghi, Ehsan
    Abaei, Mohammad Mahdi
    Abbassi, Rouzbeh
    Garaniya, Vikram
    Abdussamie, Nagi
    Heasman, Kevin
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2024, 229
  • [44] Solar Panel Cooling System Evaluation: Visual PROMETHEE Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach
    Rehman, Ateekh Ur
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (17)
  • [45] Hesitant triangular fuzzy FlowSort method: the multi-criteria decision-making problems
    Gholizade, Masoume
    Rahmanimanesh, Mohammad
    Soltanizadeh, Hadi
    Sana, Shib Sankar
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMS SCIENCE-OPERATIONS & LOGISTICS, 2023, 10 (01)
  • [46] State-of-the-art review on multi-criteria decision-making in the transport sector
    Yannis, George
    Kopsacheili, Angeliki
    Dragomanovits, Anastasios
    Petraki, Virginia
    JOURNAL OF TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING-ENGLISH EDITION, 2020, 7 (04) : 413 - 431
  • [47] Multi-Criteria Inventory Classification Based on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Technique
    Rauf, Mudassar
    Guan, Zailin
    Sarfraz, Shoaib
    Mumtaz, Jabir
    Almaiman, Sulaiman
    Shehab, Essam
    Jahanzaib, Mirza
    ADVANCES IN MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY XXXII, 2018, 8 : 343 - 348
  • [48] Six sigma project prioritization and selection: a multi-criteria decision making approach in healthcare industry
    Pakdil, Fatma
    Toktas, Pelin
    Can, Gulin Feryal
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEAN SIX SIGMA, 2021, 12 (03) : 553 - 578
  • [49] Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making
    Wang, Jiang-Jiang
    Jing, You-Yin
    Zhang, Chun-Fa
    Zhao, Jun-Hong
    RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2009, 13 (09) : 2263 - 2278
  • [50] Using Different Qualitative Scales in a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Procedure
    Gonzalez del Pozo, Raquel
    Dias, Luis C.
    Luis Garcia-Lapresta, Jose
    MATHEMATICS, 2020, 8 (03)