Fig 1.
The MABAC method based on rough Z-numbers.
Fig 2.
The upper and the lower approximation area.
Fig 3.
Schematic of the proposed mortise and tenon joint structure selection method.
Fig 4.
The Pugh decision matrix for mortise and tenon joints.
Fig 5.
The sketch map of the bucket cabinet.
Fig 6.
The Pugh decision matrix of the structures.
Table 1.
Linguistic information for the evaluation.
Table 2.
The 8 criteria used in phase 2.
Table 3.
Weight of each expert based on consistency theory.
Table 4.
Weighted matrix of alternative A1.
Table 5.
Weighted matrix of alternative A1.
Table 6.
The rankings of the 7 alternatives according to MABAC.
Fig 7.
Results of sensitivity analysis.
Fig 8.
The SCC for weight change experiment.
Fig 9.
The difference among some MADM methods.
Fig 10.
The rankings of the alternatives determined by different methods.
Fig 11.
The Spearman correlation coefficients between the results of the methods.