Rene A. Santa Cruz Rodriguez
Santa Catarina State University Brazil
E-mail: adolfo.rodriguez@udesc.br
Submission: 11/06/2018
Accept: 01/07/2018
ABSTRACT
Program Evaluation and Review Technique
(PERT) is widely used for project management in real world applications. The
aim of this paper is to simulate and analyze a PERT network under conditions of
uncertainty though a hybrid model. The basic assumption is that a project under
extreme conditions of uncertainty can be satisfactorily modelled by using
simple fuzzy linguistic variables to estimate activities durations, and a
probability distribution function randomly selected in order to measure the
activity times. Fuzzy linguistic expressions are used to estimate the activity
time. Activity parameters are calculated by using basic operations between
triangular fuzzy numbers and centroid method with classical Beta PERT
definition. For each activity time a probability distribution function is
randomly selected from a set of four possible distributions commonly cited in
the literature. Hypothetical projects with 4, 40, 400 and 4000 activities using
the proposed model are analyzed; the project duration is estimated through
Monte Carlo Simulation. Finally, results are analyzed and compared with
classical Beta PERT technique.
Keywords: Pert; Fuzzy Sets; Project
Management.
1. INTRODUCTION
A
project network is a set of activities that must be performed according to a
given pre-defined sequence, that is, each activity cannot start until all
preceding activities have been completed. When the activity duration times are
clear, known and deterministic, the Critical Path Method (CPM) can be used to
measure and control de project activities.
Thus,
CPM uses one deterministic value for each activity duration time. However, in
real world this may not be fulfilled accurately due to the vagueness of
activity duration times. To deal with such situations, in the 1950s the Program
Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) was development as a U.S. Navy project
based on probabilities (MALCOLM et al., 1959).
In
PERT technique, activity durations are defined by stochastic variables and beta
distribution is used as a satisfactory model for the activity time
distribution. Three numbers are estimated for each activity: optimistic, most
likely and pessimistic times. With those three values the expected completion
time and variance for each activity are calculated and it is assumed a normal
distribution for the project duration (GREENBERG; BEN-YAIR, 2010;
HERRERÍAS-VELASCO et al., 2011).
Although
PERT is a widely used tool, it received some disagreement concerning its
assumptions. In such a way, a non-exhaustive list could refer to the following
subjects: proposed activity distribution, activity times, method of determining
the parameters and project completion time, three-point estimations,
independence of activities, result of the PERT calculation and the omission of
the activity calendars (HAJDU, 2013).
In
the literature, some authors have proposed many different distributions other
than beta, such as the normal distribution, doubly truncated normal
distribution, lognormal distribution, the mixed beta and uniform distribution,
triangular distribution, parkinson distribution, tilted beta distribution,
weibull distribution, mixture distributions (BENDELL, et al. 1995;
PREMACHANDRA, 2001; ABDELKADER, 2004; MOHAN, et al., 2007; HAHN, 2008; MCCOMBS,
et al., 2009; SHANKAR, et al., 2010; LÓPEZ MARTÍN, et al., 2012).
Alternatively,
others studies keeps the initial model because it considers that the use of
different distributions does not affect significantly the distribution of
project duration, and the principal focus mast be the accuracy of activity time
estimations (KAMBUROWSKI, 1997; HAJDU; BOKOR, 2016).
Another
approach was developed from the 1970s combining fuzzy sets and PERT technique
for measuring imprecision or vagueness in the activity time estimations
(CHANAS; ZIELIŃSKI, 2001; CHEN, 2007; CHEN; HUANG, 2007; HSIAU; LIN, 2009; KE;
LIU, 2010; LIBERATORE, 2016; GLADYSZ, 2017). In this case, fuzzy numbers may be
preferred to probability theory in measuring activity duration uncertainty if
the past data are not relevant or are not available or the definition of the
activity itself is somewhat uncertain or the notion of completion of the
activity is vague (CHEN; HSUEH, 2008; LIBERATORE, 2008).
In
this approach, fuzzy variables are used to estimate the activity time, usually
a trapezoidal or triangular number represents the range of pessimistic to
optimistic variation of time. The minimum and maximum time of project duration
is calculated by operations and ranking methods among fuzzy numbers.
The
objective of this paper is to simulate and analyze a PERT network under
conditions of uncertainty though a hybrid model. The basic assumption is that
the project network under extreme conditions of uncertainty can be satisfactory
modelled and solved by combining two elements: i) simple linguistic variables
to estimate activities durations, and ii) random selection of the probability
distributions functions for modelling and measure the project conclusion time.
Each activity time is estimated using three linguistic variables expressed by
specific triangular fuzzy numbers.
To
achieve this goal, the arrangement of this paper is as follows. The research
methodology is described in Section 2. Beta PERT Technique and Fuzzy Theory
Sets basics are discussed in Section 3. In Section 4 a Hybrid Pert-Fuzzy method
is designed, a numerical example is presented and the result is compared with
the traditional Beta PERT technique. Finally, same conclusions are drawn in
Section 5.
2. METHODOLOGY
In
this section, the methodology followed in this paper is described. Firstly, using fuzzy linguistic expressions three times are
estimated for each activity: optimistic, most likely and pessimistic. The
centroid method is used for defuzzification each fuzzy number to get a crisp
value of activity time.
Secondly,
by using basic operations among fuzzy numbers the mean of the activity time is calculated.
The variance of each activity is calculated using the crisp time in accordance
with the variance definition of classical Beta PERT technique.
Thirdly,
for each activity a random probability density function is assigned from a set
of four possible distributions, that is, normal distribution, lognormal
distribution, beta distribution and triangular distribution.
Fourthly,
the project duration time is estimated using the Monte Carlo Simulation with
preselected probability density function. Finally, results are compared with
the classical Beta PERT technique.
3. PERT AND LINGUISTIC VARIABLES
In
the following section, a briefly review of basic definitions of PERT technique
and of linguistic variables are described.
3.1.
Pert
technique
PERT
is a network based aid for planning, measuring and controlling many
interrelated activities in a large and complex project. A project with few
activities can be represented graphically to show the precedence or parallel
relationships among the activities. Thus an activity occurs when all previous
activities have been completed. Figure 1 shows a simple example of project
network.
Figure
1: Simple Pert Network
Source: adapted from Hermans; Leus (2018).
In
a PERT network, the activity durations are defined by stochastic variables that
are assumed to be independent of each other. This method uses beta distribution
as an adequate distribution of activity duration, Equation 1 as follows defines
this function (SHANKAR, et al., 2010).
(1)
The
numbers (a, b) are endpoints of the domain of x, and (α, β) the parameters of
the beta distribution. The distribution is identified as Beta PERT if the both
parameters are greater than one, in this case, f(x) has one maximum and tends
to zero at the endpoints of the domain. In PERT technique, the expected time
for each activity can be approximated by the Equation 2.
(2)
The
numeric values a, m and b are determined by experts subjectively and represents
the “optimistic”, “most likely” and “pessimistic” activity times. Figure 2
shows a typical density function of this distribution.
Figure
2: Beta Pert Distribution Function
Source: adapted from Hajdu
(2013).
Regarding
the variance of each activity time, if three standard deviation times are
considered for the pessimistic and optimistic times, then there are six
standard deviations between them, as shown in Equation 3.
(3)
Optimistic
time is generally the shortest time in which the activity can be completed,
most likely time is the completion time having the highest probability, and
pessimistic time is the longest time that an activity might require.
In
original PERT a project duration follow a normal distribution where both the
expected value and variance of total project durations are respectively the sum
of expected activity durations and variances of activities along the critical
path. The estimated project duration time is the longest path thorough the
project network, thus activities on the critical path are the ones witch
absolutely must be done on time (HAJDU, 2013).
3.2.
Linguistic
variables
In 1970s, the Fuzzy Set theory was
developed by Zadeh based on the notions of linguistic variable and fuzzy logic
to handle uncertainty that is non-statistical in nature, namely, the intrinsic
ambiguity than a statistical variation (ZADEH, 1999). Classical sets contain
objects that satisfy absolute precise properties of membership [0 or 1] while
the theory of fuzzy set provides the gradual association of elements in a set.
To achieve this task, a membership function value is
not precise and it can vary in the real unit interval [0,1] where the endpoints
values of 0 and 1 represents not membership and full membership, respectively.
Therefore, the main difference is the membership functions; in the first case,
a classical set A has a unique membership function ϕA(x), in the second case, a
fuzzy set A can have an infinite number of membership functions µA(x) to
represent it. Figure 3 shows the comparison between crisp and fuzzy concepts (ROSS,
2010).
Figure
3: Crisp and Fuzzy concepts.
Source: adapted from Ross
(2010).
Thus, a fuzzy set A in R (real line) is defined to be
a set of ordered pairs
A = {(x,μA(x)) / x ∈ R}. It is named normal if there is at least one point
x ∈ R with
μ(x) = 1 and convex if for any x, y ∈ R and any λ ∈ [0, 1], has the following
μ(λx + (1 − λ)y) ≥ min{μ(x), μ(y)}. A
fuzzy number is a fuzzy set on the real line that satisfies these both
conditions (NASSERI, 2008).
Among the various shapes of fuzzy numbers, triangular
fuzzy numbers are the most popular ones, it is represented with three points
(a,b,c) by the following membership function:
In
addition, a to b is an increasing function, b
to c is a decreasing function and the
following constraint must be satisfied a
≤ b ≤ c (GANI; ASSARUDEEN, 2012). In order to analyze the operations
between fuzzy numbers, let be p(p1,p2,p3) and q(q1,q2,q3) two triangular fuzzy
numbers and k a positive scalar
number, the basics fuzzy operations used in this paper are defined as:
The
values of linguistic variables are words or sentences in a natural or
artificial language. Zadeh defined a linguistic variable by a quintuple (H,
T(H), U, G, M) where H is the name of the variable; T(H) is the term set of H
(the collection of its linguistic values); U is a universe of discourse; G is a
syntactic rule for the generation of the names of H; M is a semantic rule for
associating its meaning with each H, M(X), which is a fuzzy subset of U (ZADEH,
1974; ZADEH, 1975).
The author also defines the
linguistic term set by means of a context free grammar, and their semantic as
fuzzy numbers described by membership functions. Following
this approach, the activity duration can be described using simple linguistic
terms, namely, by a fuzzy number, most specifically by a triangular or
trapezoidal fuzzy number (ZHANG; LI, 2005).
On
the other hand, defuzzification is the process for conversion a fuzzy number to
a crisp value. The popular centroid defuzzification method defines the centroid
coordinate of A in horizontal axis as it defuzzified value which can be
calculated as follow (UEHARA; HIROTA, 1998; WANG; LUOH, 2000).
Therefore,
for a triangular number A = (a,b,c) the centroid is:
3.3.
A
Hybrid Pert Technique
For
simplification purposes, in this section a sequence of n activities is used to
represent the steeps of a simple project network, which has a single critical
path as shown in Figure 4.
Figure
4: Network activities.
Since the activity duration in a
project network is usually very difficult to be determined exactly, fuzzy
linguistic expression combined with probability density functions randomly
selected are introduced for each of them. In this step, expressions such as
“approximately between x and y units of time” were used in order to estimate
pessimistic, most likely and optimistic activity times with positive triangular
fuzzy numbers as semantics values. Table 1 shows linguistic expression and
their fuzzy numbers for a project activity.
According to Equation 5, the
average time of this activity was (11.3, 13.67, 16) hours. In this case, their
centroid represents a crisp number of the activity time. As shown in Equation 9
the average time was 13.7 hours. The activity variance was estimated using the
Equation 3 with centroids of optimistic and pessimistic times calculated
according to the Equation 9, namely, Variance (x) = 6.25 hours.
Table 1: Linguistic expressions for a project activity
time
Linguistic expression |
Fuzzy number |
Optimistic: approximately between 5 and 9
hours |
(5,7,9) |
Most
likely: approximatively between 11 and 13 hours |
(11,12,13) |
Pessimistic: approximatively between 18 and
26 hours |
(18,22,26) |
The
next step is to determine the activity time behavior. As the basic assumptions
are conditions of extreme uncertainty, it is very hard to specify some
probability distribution function that can represent the time behavior. Thus,
it is assumed that a probability distribution function can be randomly selected
for this purpose. To this end, a set of probability distribution functions
commonly cited in the literature was considered.
Four
distributions were assigned for this task, namely, Classic Beta Pert,
Lognormal, Normal and Uniform. Therefore, for each activity a probability
distribution function was randomly selected from these four alternatives. In
each case, distribution parameters were calculated using mean and standard
deviations that were obtained in the previous step. A total project time was
estimated using Monte Carlo Simulation technique with above given parameters.
Calculations have been performed by an application developed in Object Pascal
on Linux platform.
Using
the hybrid technique a hypothetical project with few activities was initially
considered. In this case, a project has the following characteristics: i) only
four activities, ii) linguistic variables with symmetric triangular fuzzy
numbers, iii) alpha parameters of fuzzy numbers ranging from 5 to 10% and 5 to
20% of their centroid value, and iv) each activity has a different probability
distribution function. Table 2 shows the activities with fuzzy numbers and
probability distribution functions used in Monte Carlo Simulation.
Figure
5 shows the project time after 10000 experiments. The project duration time in
the first case was estimated as 167.26 hours and the standard deviation as 5.72
hours while the time, calculated according to the classical Beta PERT, was
166.8 hours and 3.7 hours as standard deviations.
On
the assumption that the estimates of experts could be even broader or wider, it
was assumed that alpha parameter of linguistic variables could vary randomly
between 5 to 20% with respect to centroid number. In the same way that the
above case, simulation results suggest a little difference between project
duration with alpha ranging from 5 to 20% of their centroid number and time
obtained using classic Beta PERT technique.
Table 2: Activity parameters
Description |
Activities [A, B, C, D] |
Fuzzy activity time (h) |
|
Optimistic |
[(35,37,39), (9,10,11), (64,70,76), (26,28,30)] |
Most
likely |
[(41,45,49), (11,12,13), (71,76,81), (31,34,37)] |
Pessimistic |
[(43,47,51), (15,17,19), (75,81,87), (40,43,46)] |
Mean |
[(39.7,43.0,46.3), (11.7,13.0,14.3), (70.0,75.7,81.3), (32.3,35.0,37.7)] |
Variance |
[2.78, 1.36, 3.36, 6.25] |
Probability
distribution function |
[Normal, Uniform, Lognormal, Triangular] |
This
result shows an expected behavior: if the period between x and y values in
expert linguistic expression is wide for estimate pessimistic, most likely and
optimistic activity times, then the final project duration will have a major
impact.
Figure
5: Project evaluation with four activities.
In
order to analyze the effects on project with higher number of activities, three
other hypothetical examples were considered with the following characteristics:
i) number of activities 40, 400, and 4000, ii) linguistic variables with
symmetric triangular fuzzy numbers, iii) alpha parameter of fuzzy numbers
ranging from 5 to 10% and 5 to 20% of their centroid number, and iv) each
activity is associated with a probability distribution function randomly
selected from a set of probability distribution functions.
In
this case, estimation of activity times was obtained by Monte Carlo simulation.
Triangular numbers are generated varying randomly from 10 to 200 hours for
pessimistic, most likely and optimistic times. In the same way, the time
between parameters of triangular fuzzy numbers for pessimistic, most likely and
optimistic times were generated randomly from 2 to 5 hours.
Alpha
values were also estimated by simulations, in the first case between 5 and 10%
and in the second case varying between 5 to 20% of the centroid number. Again,
for each activity a probability distribution function was randomly selected
from a set of preselected probability distribution functions.
Figure
6 shows the results of a project with 40 activities. Simulation process suggest
that the difference between the project time using this hybrid model and the
results obtained by the traditional Beta Pert can be considered acceptable
because they show little difference. Although the project completion time of
the simulations has shown similar values, there are much larger differences
among standard deviations. The standard deviation using Beta Pert technique
shows lower values compared with those obtained with the proposed hybrid
method.
Figure
6. Project evaluation with 40 activities.
Figure
7 shows the next case, an artificial project network is simulated with 400
activities. Results of the experiment confirm the previous case. In three
simulations, the project completion time were relatively close and do not show
many variations in their values. However, it is observed that the standard
deviations show similar behavior to the previous case, the value obtained by
the classic Beta Pert was lower compared to the other numeric values. When the
alpha parameter of linguistic variable is greater, the standard deviation of
the project completion time is also higher.
Figure
7. Project evaluation with 400 activities.
Finally,
an artificial project network with 4000 activities was analyzed. The results,
shows in the Figure 8, seem to confirm the previous cases. Project completion
time using classical Beta Pert present lower value compared with hybrid model,
but this variation is relatively small around 1%. However, the behavior of the
standard deviation is something different. The standard deviation calculated
with the classic Beta PERT is smaller than the hybrid method with parameters
alpha ranging up 5 to 10 and 20%.
Figure
8. Project evaluation with 4000 activities.
4. CONCLUSIONS
Beta
PERT technique is widely used for management and control projects in real world
applications. In PERT technique the activity duration is defined by a
stochastic variable and uses a beta distribution as sufficient model to
represent its activity time.
In
this paper, it was assumed that the project under extreme conditions of
uncertainty can be satisfactory modelled using simple linguistic variables, for
estimating durations of activities, and probability distributions functions
randomly selected for the project conclusion time.
After
10000 experiments with an artificial project network with 4, 40, 400 and 4000
activities, the results suggest that the completion time obtained from a
proposed hybrid model compared with a classical Beta PERT is not much
different. On the other hand, standard deviation value of the project time with
classical Beta PERT present some variations from those obtained with hybrid
model; the higher the alpha value of the parameter of the linguistic variables,
the higher is the standard deviation of project completion time.
The
results show that regardless of the number of project activities, when a
project is under extreme conditions of uncertainty it can be satisfactory
modelled and solved using simple linguistic variables and probability
distribution function randomly selected. In this case, fuzzy variables can be
used to estimated activities duration times and probability distribution
function can be used for modelling the project conclusion time.
Therefore,
when it is not possible to determine a probability function that represents the
time activity behavior, it seems possible randomly select a probability
distribution function from a set of alternatives, which not affect
significantly the final result. In this regard, it is noted that the size of
linguistic variables end points has a greater impact on the standard deviation
of the final result, which leads to considerer that the variability of the
project completion time is more affected by the accuracy of the linguistic
estimators of activity times.
REFERENCES
ABDELKADER, Y. H. (2004) Evaluating project completion
times when activity times are Weibull distributed. European Journal of
Operational Research, v.
157, n. 3, p. 704–715. DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00269-8.
BENDELL, A.; SOLOMON, D.; CARTER, J. M. (1995)
Evaluating Project Completion Times When Activity Times are Erlang Distributed.
Journal of the Operational Research
Society, v. 46, n. 7, p. 867–882. DOI:10.2307/2583969.
CHANAS, S.; ZIELIŃSKI, P. (2001) Critical path
analysis in the network with fuzzy activity times. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, v. 122, n. 3, p. 195–204. DOI:
10.1016/S0165-0114(00)00076-2.
CHEN, S. P. (2007) Analysis of critical paths in a
project network with fuzzy activity times. European
Journal of Operational Research, v. 183, n. 1, p. 442–459. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.06.053.
CHEN, C. T.; HUANG, D. F. (2007) Applying fuzzy method
for measuring criticality in project network. Information Sciences, v. 177, n. 12, p. 2448–2458. DOI:
10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.035.
CHEN, S. P.; HSUEH, Y. J. (2008) A simple approach to
fuzzy critical path analysis in project networks. Applied Mathematical Modelling, n. 32, p. 1289–1297. DOI:
10.1016/j.apm.2007.04.009.
GANI, A. N.; ASSARUDEEN, S. N. M. (2012) A new
operation on triangular fuzzy number for solving fuzzy linear programming
problem. Applied Mathematical Sciences,
n. 6, p. 525–532.
GLADYSZ, B. (2017) Fuzzy-probabilistic PERT. Annals of Operations Research, n. 258, p.
437-452. DOI: 10.1007/s10479-016-2315-0.
GREENBERG, D.; BEN-YAIR, A. (2010) Beta-Distribution
Models in Stochastic Project Management. Computer
Modelling and New Technologies, v. 14, n. 4, p. 14–18.
HAHN, E. D. (2008) Mixture densities for project
management activity times: A robust approach to PERT. European Journal of Operational Research, v. 188, p. 450–459. DOI:
10.1016/j.ejor.2007.04.032.
HAJDU, M. (2013) Effects of the application of
activity calendars on the distribution of project duration in PERT networks. Automation in Construction, n. 35, p. 397–404.
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.025.
HAJDU, M.; BOKOR, O. (2016) Sensitivity analysis in
PERT networks: Does activity duration distribution matter? Automation in Construction, n. 65, p. 1–8. DOI:
10.1016/j.autcon.2016.01.003.
HERMANS, B.; LEUS, R. (2018) Scheduling Markovian PERT
networks to maximize the net present value: New results. Operations Research Letters, n. 46, p. 240-244. DOI:
10.1016/j.orl.2018.01.010.
HERRERÍAS-VELASCO, J. M.; HERRERÍAS-PLEGUEZUELO, R.;
VAN DORP, J. R. (2011) Revisiting the PERT mean and variance. European Journal of Operational Research,
v. 210, n. 2, p. 448–451. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2010.08.014.
HSIAU, H. J. R.; LIN, C. W. (2009) A fuzzy pert
approach to evaluate plant construction project scheduling risk under uncertain
resources capacity. Journal of
Industrial Engineering and Management, v. 2, n. 1, p. 31–47. DOI:
10.3926/jiem..v2n1.p31-47.
KAMBUROWSKI, J. (1997) New validations of PERT times. Omega, International Journal of Management
Science, v. 25, n. 3, p. 323–328. DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0483(97)00002-9.
KE, H.; LIU, B. (2010) Fuzzy project scheduling
problem and its hybrid intelligent algorithm. Applied Mathematical Modelling, v. 34, n. 2, p. 301–308. DOI:
10.1016/j.apm.2009.04.011.
LIBERATORE, M. J. (2008) Critical Path Analysis With
Fuzzy Activity Times. IEEE Transactions
on Engineering Management, v. 55, n. 2, p. 329–337. DOI: 10.1109/TEM.2008.919678.
LIBERATORE, M. J. (2016) A counterexample to the
forward recursion in fuzzy critical path analysis under discrete fuzzy sets, International Journal of Fuzzy Logic
Systems, n. 6, p. 53-62. DOI: 10.5121/ijfls.2016.6204.
LÓPEZ MARTÍN, M. M.; GARCÍA GARCÍA, C. B.; GARCÍA
PÉREZ, J.; SÁNCHEZ GRANERO, M. (2012) An alternative for robust estimation in
project management. European Journal of
Operational Research, v. 220, n. 2, p. 443–451. DOI:
10.1016/j.ejor.2012.01.058.
MALCOLM, D. G.; ROSEBOOM, J. H.; CLARK, C. E.; FAZAR,
W. (1959) Application of a Technique for Research and Development Program
Evaluation. Operations Research, v. 7,
n. 5, p. 646–669. DOI: 10.1287/opre.7.5.646.
MCCOMBS, E. L.; ELAM, M. E.; PRATT, D. B. (2009)
Estimating Task Duration in PERT using the Weibull Probability Distribution. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical
Methods, v. 8, n. 1, p. 282–288.
MOHAN, S.; GOPALAKRISHNAN, M.;
BALASUBRAMANIAN. H.; CHANDRASHEKAR, A. (2007) A lognormal approximation
of activity duration in PERT using two time estimates. Journal of the Operational Research Society, v. 58, n. 6, p.
827–831. DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602204.
NASSERI, H. (2008) Fuzzy Numbers : Positive and
Nonnegative, International Mathematical
Forum, v. 3, n. 36, p. 1777-1780.
PREMACHANDRA, I. M. (2001) An approximation of the
activity duration distribution in PERT. Computers
& Operations Research, n. 28, p. 443–452. DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0548(99)00129-X.
ROSS, T. J. (2010) Fuzzy logic with engineering applications. UK: John Wiley &
Sons.
SHANKAR, N. R.; RAO, K. S. N.; SIREESHA, V. (2010)
Estimating the Mean and Variance of Activity Duration in PERT. International Mathematical Forum, v. 5,
n. 18, p. 861–868.
UEHARA, K.; HIROTA, K. (1998) Parallel and multistage
fuzzy inference based on families of α-level
sets. Journal of Information Science,
n. 106, p. 159-195.
WANG, W-J.; LUOH, L. (2000) Simple computation for the
defuzzifications of center of sum and center of gravity. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, n. 9, p. 53-59.
ZADEH, L. A. (1974) The Concept of a Linguistic
Variable and its Application to Approximate Reasoning. In Fu, K.S. et al.
(eds.), Learning Systems and Intelligent
Robots, p. 1–10.
ZADEH, L. A. (1975) The concept of a linguistic
variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I. Information Sciences, n. 8, p. 199–249.
ZADEH, L. A. (1999) Fuzzy Sets as a basis for a theory
of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems,
v. 100, n. 1, p. 9–34.
ZHANG, H.; TAM, C.M.; LI, H. (2005) Modeling uncertain
activity duration by fuzzy number and discrete-event simulation. European Journal of Operational Research,
n. 164, p. 715–729. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.01.035.