Extension of interval-valued Pythagorean FDOSM for evaluating and benchmarking real-time SLRSs based on multidimensional criteria of hand gesture recognition and sensor glove perspectives

Several DataGlove wearable electronic devices based on real-time Sign Language Recognition Systems (SLRSs) have been developed recently to assist the deaf and dumb community in translating hand gestures to their spoken language equivalents. Multidimensional evaluation and benchmarking of these systems are critical for determining the most desirable approach for meeting all essential requirements. However, this process is considered a Multicriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) problem due to the presence of several issues, including multiple evaluation criteria, criteria importance and criteria confliction. Hence, the MCDM approach is required to solve these issues. In this study, a new extension of the Fuzzy Decision by Opinion Score Method (FDOSM) for evaluating and benchmarking SLRSs is developed under an Interval-Valued Pythagorean Fuzzy Set (IVPFS) named IVP-FDOSM. Fundamentally, the methodology includes two phases. In the first phase, a decision matrix is formulated on the basis of identified 'multidimensional criteria of hand gesture recognition and sensor glove perspectives' and `real-time SLRSs'. The second phase introduces the development of IVP-FDOSM in two stages. The decision matrix is transformed into an opinion matrix in the first stage (data transformation unit). Meanwhile, in the second stage (data-processing unit), the opinion matrix is converted into fuzzy opinion decision matrices with the assistance of three experts by transforming the opinion matrix's linguistic terms to Interval-Value Pythagorean Fuzzy Numbers (IVPFNs). Results indicate the following: (1) individual benchmarking results of real-time SLRS showed high variation (90%) based on the preference of each Decision Maker (DM), with only 10% of preferences being identical. (2) The results of group benchmarking reveal that the 10th real-time SLRS was the optimal one and the 6th was the worst. In addition, the rates of ranking match between the group benchmarking and each DM (first DM, second DM and third DM) were 23%, 37% and 43%, respectively. (3) For the results evaluation, the statistical test-based objective assessment shows that the first group received the lowest mean value (2.80333), while the third group received the highest mean (3.8). These values indicate that the group benchmarked systems resulting from IVP-FDOSM are undergoing a systematic ranking. Furthermore, the comparative analysis reveals that IVP-FDOSM is superior to IVP-TOPSIS and IVP-AHP in terms of ranking and weighting. (C) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.