Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Comparison of hexagonal fuzzy numbers with varied defuzzification

methods in optimization of EOQ using GP technique
K. Kalaiarasi a, H. Mary Henrietta b,⇑, M. Sumathi c
a
PG and Research Department of Mathematics, Cauvery College for Women (Affiliated to Bharathidasan University), Trichy 620 018, Tamilnadu, India
b
Department of Mathematics, Saveetha Engineering College, Chennai 602 105, Tamilnadu, India
c
PG and Research Department of Mathematics, Khadir Moideen College (Affiliated to Bharathidasan University), Adirampattinam 614 701, Tamilnadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The paper discusses about minimizing the total cost in an economic order quantity by applying geometric
Received 24 November 2020 programming. In order for a smooth functioning ofinventory management system the assortment of
Accepted 7 December 2020 stocks and various costs along with demand have to be perfectly balanced. The sustainable model con-
Available online xxxx
siders the carbon emissions with limitations on warehouse capacity. The parameter demand is fuzzified
by using hexagonal fuzzy numbers and varying the defuzzification methods and results are analyzed.
Keywords: Numerical calculations are done by applying python programming. Also, sensitivity analysis is done
Economic order quantity (EOQ)
for the demand parameter and compared among with three defuzzification methods donein both crisp
Hexagonal fuzzy numbers
Ranking method
and fuzzy environment.
Graded-mean Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Signed-distance Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Emerging Trends in
Python Materials Science, Technology and Engineering.

1. Introduction capacity inventory model. Duffin [4,5] proposed Geometric pro-

The invention of fuzzy sets by Zadeh [21] in the year 1965 was
an insight to the researchers about describing imprecise terms.
Fuzzy set operations were carried out by Zimmerman [22]. Inven-
tory management is one of the major concerns to minimize cost
and maximize profit. Harris [7] developed the EOQ model thnat
minimizes various costs like holding costs, ordering costs, and stor-
age costs. In 1983, it was Park [15] had bridged the fuzzy set-
theoretical approach with Economic order quantity. Wilson [20]
in his classical paper determined the order quantity for the pur-
chased inventory and reorder quantity for the replenishment
items. Hsieh [8] has introduced the optimization for inventory
models to minimize the total cost. Chen [2] developed a probabilis-
tic model for the economic order quantity. In 2016, Durai [6]
defined membership functions for hexagonal fuzzy numbers. Shijin
[18] studied the carbon emissions for two supply-chains between
retailers and manufacturers under specified conditions. Wang
[19] considered the percentage of imperfect items as a fuzzy vari-
able and applied the PSO algorithm. Roy [17] applied geometric
programming for membership functions for a limited storage
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mary.henriet123@gmail.com (H. Mary Henrietta).
gramming with engineering application with mathematical formu-
lations. The GPP technique of optimization in inventory models
was first initiated by Kochenberger [12]. Lee [13] proposed a
multi-item economic order quantity model with storage space
and investment policy for inventory by applying the Lagrangean
duality and GP technique. Various applications of geometric pro-
gramming were studied by Peterson [16]. Mahapatra [14] applied
a geometric programming technique for economic production
quantity. In 1978, Jefferson et al [9] had given instructive surveys
on geometric programming. Zener [23,24] had introduced the con-
cept of GPP in the minimization of cost functions. In 1976, Beigh-
tler [1] had studied the advantages of real-life problems by
applying GP. In 2020a, Kalaiarasi et al [10] had compared the opti-
mization results between Lagrangian and Kuhn-Tucker methods.
Optimization of economic order quantity using GPP approach
using different fuzzification and defuzzification methods was done
by Kalaiarasi et al [11] in 2020b (Fig. 1).
In 1991, Guido van Rossum created and designed python for
readability with codes. Python is an excellent and powerful pro-
gramming language and it is highly applied in web designing, cre-
ating software, and so on. Many software companies use python
programming for efficient functioning. Python is extensively
applied in data sciences, software development, and management
techniques.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.209
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Emerging Trends in Materials Science, Technology and Engineering.

Please cite this article as: K. Kalaiarasi, H. Mary Henrietta and M. Sumathi, Comparison of hexagonal fuzzy numbers with varied defuzzification methods in
optimization of EOQ using GP technique, Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.209
K. Kalaiarasi, H. Mary Henrietta and M. Sumathi Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

FBT qBH aFd aql

TC ¼ þ þ þ
q 2 q 2
The primal solution is given by
FðBT þ adÞ qðBH þ alÞ
minTC ¼ þ
q 2
Subject to the constraints,
FðBT þ adÞ
 1;
q

qðBH þ alÞ
 1  ð1Þ
2
The dual problem is taken as

b1
b
b
 b4
BH þal 2 FðBT þadÞ 3 BH þal
Max dðbÞ ¼ FðBTqþadÞ 2b2 b3 M 1 2M 2 b
– (2)
4
Fig. 1. Comparison.
With
b1 þ b2 ¼ 1
In this paper, the crisp inventory model is solved using the geo-
metrical programming method and hexagonal fuzzy numbers are b1 þ b2  b3 þ b4 ¼ 0
used to solve the fuzzy inventory model with three different
The degree of difficulty for the problem is 4  1  1 ¼ 2 which
defuzzification methods. We have applied python coding for calcu-
will result in having an infinite number of solutions.
lating the crisp and fuzzified values which reduce the time con-
sumed when compared with manual calculations. The program is b2 ¼ 1  b1
designed in a way that the user can choose any of the three cases
directly. b1 þ ð1b1 Þ  b3 þ b4 ¼ 0

Solving, we get b1 ¼ 1þb24 b3 and b2 ¼ 1b24 þb3 b1 and b2 substitut-

2. Preliminaries
ing for in equation (2), the dual function gets transformed into,
2.1. Definition: Fuzzy set [19]  1þb42b3  1b42þb3
2FðBT þ adÞ BH þ al
dðb3 ; b4 Þ ¼
1 þ b4  b3 1  b4 þ b3
Let X is a space of points (objects). A fuzzy set A in X is an object  b3  b
of the form F ¼ fðx; lF ðxÞ : x 2 Xg where lF : X ! ½0; 1 FðBT þ adÞ BH þ al 4

b3 M 1 2M2 b4
2.2. Definition: Hexagonal fuzzy number [6]
by taking log on both sides of the above equation, we maximize
  dðb3 ; b4 Þ to find the values of b3 and b4
A hexagonal fuzzy number F H denoted by is F H =
1 þ b4  b3
ðf 1 ; f 2 ; f 3 ; f 4 ; f 5 ; f 6 Þ where f 1 ; f 2 ; f 3 ; f 4 ; f 5 ; f 6 real numbers are having log dðb3 ; b4 Þ ¼ ½logð2F ðBT þ adÞ  logð1 þ b4  b3 Þ
2
a membership function as
8
 1  b4 þ b3
þ ½log ðBH þ alÞ  logð1  b4 þ b3 Þ
>
> 1 xf 1
f1  x  f2 2
>
> 2 f 2 f 1    
>
>
 FðBT þ adÞ
>
> þ b3 log  log b3
>
>
1
þ 12 fxf 2
f2  x  f3
>
> 2 3 f 2 M1
>
<    
1f  x  f 4 BH þ al
lF H ðxÞ ¼
3  þ b4 log  log b4
>
> 1 xf 4
1  2 f f f 4  x  f 5 2M 2
>
>
>
>

5

4
>
> Partially differentiating w.r.t b3 and b4 and equating to zero,
>
> 1 f 6 x
f5  x  f6
>
> 2 f 6 f 5
>
: dðlog dðb3 ; b4 ÞÞ dðlog dðb3 ; b4 ÞÞ
0otherwise i:e:; ¼ 0& ¼0
db3 db4
F - demand
q – total delivery quantity 1 1
)  ½log ð2F ðBT þ adÞ  log ð1 þ b4  b3 ÞÞ þ
BT – transportation cost of unit delivery 2 2
BH – inventory cost of unit product per year 1
þ ½log ðBH þ alÞ  log ð1  b4 þ b3 Þ
l - carbon emission for unit product in inventory per year 2   
d - carbon emissions for unit product transportation 1 F ðBT þ awÞ
 log  log b3  1 ¼ 0
a - tax rate 2 M1

3. Inventory MODEL IN GEOMETRIC PROGRAMMING 1 1

) ½log ð2F ðBT þ adÞ  log ð1 þ b4  b3 ÞÞ 
2 2
The proposed model of solving using GPP is done by Duffin [5] 1
to obtain the geometric formulations is applied to minimize the
 ½log ðBH þ alÞ  log ð1  b4 þ b3 Þ
2   
total cost [3] 1 BH þ al
  þ log  log b4  1 ¼ 0
FBT qBH Fd ql 2 2M 2
Totalcost ¼ þ þa þ
q 2 q 2

2
K. Kalaiarasi, H. Mary Henrietta and M. Sumathi Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

   1=2  1=2  F
b1
b2  F 1 þF 2 þF 3 þF 4 þF 5 þF 6
ðB b3
F ðBT þ adÞ 1 BH þ al 1  b4 þ b3 1 þF 2 þF 3 þF 4 þF 5 þF 6 ðBT þadÞ BH þal T þadÞ
¼e Max dðwÞ ¼ 6 6

2F ðBT þ adÞ 1 þ b4  b3
q 2b2 b3 M 1
M1 b3

b4
BH þal
   1=2  1=2 2M2 b4
BH þ al 1 2F ðBT þ adÞ 1 þ b4  b3 with
¼e
2M 2 b4 BH þ al 1  b4 þ b3
b1 þ b2 ¼ 1
F ðBT þ adÞðBH þ alÞ b1 þ b2  b3 þ b4 ¼ 0
¼ e2
2M 1 M2 b3 b4

!1þb42b3  1b42þb3
F ðBT þ adÞðBH þ alÞ 2 F 1 þF 2 þF 3 þF 4 þF 5 þF 6
ðBT þ adÞ BH þ al
) b3 b4 ¼ dðb3 ; b4 Þ ¼ 6
2M1 M 2 e2 1 þ b4  b3 1  b4 þ b3
F þF þF þF þF 5 þF
!b 3  b
F ðBT þ adÞ
1 2 3
6
4 6
ðBT þ adÞ BH þ al 4

¼ b1 d ðbÞ b3 M1 2M 2 b4
q
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

ffi
qðBH þ alÞ  2 F 1 þF 2 þF 3 þF 4 þF 5 þF 6
ðBT þ adÞ
¼ b2 d ðbÞ q¼ 6
2 ðBH þ alÞ
F ðBT þ adÞ s ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

ffi
¼ b1 dðbÞ F 1 þF 2 þF 3 þF 4 þF 5 þF 6
q ½ð B T þ a d Þ  ½B H þ a l 
minTC ¼ 6
0:5
qðBH þ alÞ
¼ b2 dðbÞ
2
3.3. Approach (ii)
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2F ðBT þ adÞb2 Fuzzy approach through hexagonal fuzzy numbers and defuzzi-
q¼
ðBH þ alÞb1 fication was carried out by signed-distance method

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi F ðBT þ adÞ qðBH þ alÞ

½FðBT þ adÞ½BH þ al minTC ¼ þ
TC ¼ q 2
2b1 b2
subject to the constraints,
When M 1 ! 1 and M 2 ! 1 we see that b3 ¼ 0 and b4 ¼ 0,
henceforth as per conditions of the geometric programming we F ðBT þ adÞ
 1;
see that b1 þ b2 ¼ 1. i.e., b1 ¼ 12 and b2 ¼ 12 q
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2F ðBT þ adÞ
q¼ qðBH þ alÞ
ðBH þ alÞ 1
2
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi The duality of equation (2) becomes,
½FðBT þ adÞ½BH þ al
minTC ¼ Max
0:5  F þ2F þF þF þ2F þF
b1
b2  F1 þ2F2 þF3 þF4 þ2F5 þF6
ðB þadÞb3
1 2 3 4 5 6 ðB þadÞ
BH þal
dðwÞ ¼ 8 T 8 T
q 2b2 b3 M 1

3.1. Fuzzification of the inventory model
b4

BH þal
2M 2 b4

The crisp value is fuzzified by using hexagonal numbers and with

varying defuzzification methods as below.
b1 þ b2 ¼ 1
3.2. Approach (i)
b1 þ b2  b3 þ b4 ¼ 0
Fuzzy approach through hexagonal fuzzy numbers and defuzzi-
fication carried out by ranking method. The parameter demand F in
F 1 þ2F 2 þF 3 þF 4 þ2F 5 þF 6
!1þb42b3  1b42þb3
the primal solution is fuzzified by hexagonal numbers followed by 2 ðBT þ adÞ B H þ al
the defuzzification process by ranking method. dðb3 ; b4 Þ ¼ 8
1 þ b4  b3 1  b4 þ b3
F 1 þ2F 2 þF 3 þF 4 þ2F 5 þF 6
!b3  b
F ðBT þ adÞ qðBH þ alÞ ðBT þ adÞ BH þ al 4
minTC ¼ þ 8
q 2 b3 M 1 2M 2 b4
subject to the constraints,
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

F ðBT þ adÞ 2 F 1 þ2F 2 þF 312 þF 4 þ2F 5 þF 6

ðBT þ adÞ
 1; ¼
q ðBH þ alÞ
s ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

qðBH þ alÞ F 1 þ2F 2 þF 3 þF 4 þ2F 5 þF 6

1 ½ðBT þ adÞ½BH þ al
2 minTC ¼ 8
0:5
The duality of equation 2 becomes,
3
K. Kalaiarasi, H. Mary Henrietta and M. Sumathi Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

3.4. Approach (iii) Table 2

Fuzzy approach through hexagonal fuzzy numbers and defuzzi- print(‘‘——————————————————————————————————”)

fication was done by graded mean integration representation print(‘‘2.signed distance method”)
method. print(‘‘case 2”)
nu=2*((f1+(2*f2)+f3+f4+(2*f5)+f6)/8)*(Bt+(a*g))
F ðBT þ adÞ qðBH þ alÞ din=(Bh+(a*u))
minTC ¼ þ bot=nu/din
q 2 print(‘‘final value(q)=”,math.sqrt(bot))
nu=((f1+(2*f2)+f3+f4+(2*f5)+f6)/8)*(Bt+(a*g))*(Bh+(a*u))
subject to the constraints,
tot=nu/0.5
print(‘‘final value(tc)=”,math.sqrt(tot))
F ðBT þ adÞ
 1; print(‘‘——————————————————————————————————”)
q print(‘‘3.graded-mean representation method”)
print(‘‘case 3:”)
qðBH þ alÞ nu=2*((f1+(3*f2)+(2*f3)+(2*f4)+(3*f5)+f6)/12)*(Bt+(a*g))
1 din=(Bh+(a*u))
2 bot=nu/din
The duality of equation (2) becomes, print(‘‘final value(q)=”,math.sqrt(bot))
 F
b 1
b2  F1 þ3F2 þ2F3 þ2F4 þ3F5 þF6
ðB b 3 nu=((f1+(3*f2)+(2*f3)+(2*f4)+(3*f5)+f6)/12)*(Bt+(a*g))*(Bh+(a*u))
1 þ3F 2 þ2F 3 þ2F 4 þ3F 5 þF 6 ðBT þadÞ BH þal T þadÞ
Max dðwÞ ¼ 12
q 2b2
12
b3 M 1 tot=nu/0.5

b4 print(‘‘final value(tc)=”,math.sqrt(tot))
BH þal
2M 2 b4
print(‘‘——————————————————————————————————————”)
x1=str(input(‘‘do you want to continue? press ’yes’ AND ’no’ to EXIT:\n”))
With if x1==‘‘yes”:
b1 þ b2 ¼ 1 continue
else:
break
b1 þ b2  b3 þ b4 ¼ 0

F
!1þb42b3
2 1 þ3F 2 þ2F 3 þ2F 4 þ3F 5 þF 6
ðBT þ adÞ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

dðb3 ; b4 Þ ¼ 12
2 F 1 þ3F 2 þ2F 312 þ2F 4 þ3F 5 þF 6
ðBT þ adÞ
1 þ b4  b3 q¼
!b 3 ðBH þ alÞ
 1b4 þb3 F þ3F 2 þ2F 3 þ2F 4 þ3F 5 þF 6

BH þ al 2 1
12
ðBT þ adÞ
min
1  b4 þ b3 b3 M1 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
 b F þ3F þ2F þ2F þ3F 5 þF

BH þ al 4 1 2 3 4 6
½ðBT þ adÞ½BH þ al
TC ¼ 12
2M 2 b4 0:5

Table 1
4. Python approach
import math
print(‘‘Enter the crisp values of the parameters”) The numerical calculations for crisp and fuzzy EOQ are esti-
Bt=float(input(‘‘Bt=”)) mated using the below-mentioned python coding in Table 1 and
a=float(input(‘‘alpha=”)) Table 2. The program gets the input for all the parameters used
g=float(input(‘‘sigma=”)) in the total cost and computes the hexagonal fuzzy numbers with
Bh=float(input(‘‘Bh=”))
three different defuzzification methods and the results are tabu-
u=float(input(‘‘meu=”))
while True: lated. The version of python used 3.7.5 [MSC v.1916 64 bit
print(‘‘enter the F value”) (AMD64)] on win32 (Table 3).
f=float(input(‘‘F=”))
print(‘‘enter the fuzzified value of F ”)
f1=float(input(‘‘F1=”)) 5. Numerical Illustration:
f2=float(input(‘‘F2=”))
f3=float(input(‘‘F3=”)) The crisp values for the parameters are taken as Wang and Ye
f4=float(input(‘‘F4=”))
(2018) and fuzzified using hexagonal fuzzy numbers and defuzzied
f5=float(input(‘‘F5=”))
f6=float(input(‘‘F6=”)) under three cases with a sensitivity analysis
nu=2*f*(Bt+(a*g)) F ¼ 5000,BT ¼ 1000=deliv ery, BH ¼ 5=unit=year, a ¼ 30=ton,
din=(Bh+(a*u)) d ¼ 0:4ton=deliv ery, l ¼ 0:04ton=unit=year.The estimated crisp
bot=nu/din
value q ¼ 1277:59 and TC ¼ 7921:11 and compared with the fuzzi-
print(‘‘crisp value”)
print(‘‘final value(q)=”,math.sqrt(bot)) fied values.
nu=f*(Bt+(a*g))*(Bh+(a*u))
tot=nu/0.5
print(‘‘final value(tc)=”,math.sqrt(tot))
6. Conclusion
print(‘‘——————————————————————————————————”)
print(‘‘1.ranking method”) The minimization of the total cost of an economic order quan-
print(‘‘case 1:”) tity by using geometric programming was derived and applying
nu=2*((f1+f2+f3+f4+f5+f6)/6)*(Bt+(a*g))
hexagonal fuzzy numbersfor fuzzification of the demand and
din=(Bh+(a*u))
bot=nu/din defuzzification by three different defuzzification methods such as
print(‘‘final value(q)=”,math.sqrt(bot)) ranking method, signed-distance and graded-mean representation
nu=((f1+f2+f3+f4+f5+f6)/6)*(Bt+(a*g))*(Bh+(a*u)) method by using python programming. A numerical comparison
tot=nu/0.5 was done between fuzzy and crisp forms in a non-linear program-
print(‘‘final value(tc)=”,math.sqrt(tot))
ming problem and found that all the values are exactly equal.
4
K. Kalaiarasi, H. Mary Henrietta and M. Sumathi Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
Sensitivity Analyses.

Variations Values Hexagonal Numbers Crisp output Ranking method Signed distance Graded-mean
Q TC q TC Q TC q TC
 50% 2500 (2350,2400,2450,2550,2600,2650) 903.398 5601.071 903.398 5601.071 903.398 5601.071 903.398 5601.071
 25% 3750 (3450,3550,3650,3850,3950,4050) 1106.432 6859.883 1106.432 6859.883 1106.432 6859.883 1106.432 6859.883
 10% 4500 (4200,4300,4400,4600,4700,4800) 1212.036 7514.625 1212.036 7514.625 1212.036 7514.625 1212.036 7514.625
No 5000 (4700,4800,4900,5100,5200,5300) 1277.598 7921.111 1277.598 7921.111 1277.598 7921.111 1277.598 7921.111
+ 10% 5500 (5200,5300,5400,5600,5700,5800) 1339.956 8307.731 1339.956 8307.731 1339.956 8307.731 1339.956 8307.731
+ 25% 6250 (6100,6150,6200,6300,6350,6400) 1428.398 8856.071 1428.398 8856.071 1428.398 8856.071 1428.398 8856.071
+ 50% 7500 (7200,7300,7400,7600,7700,7800) 1564.732 9701.34 1564.732 9701.34 1564.732 9701.34 1564.732 9701.34

Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] C.S. Beightler, D.T. Philips, Applied geometric programming, John Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1976.
[2] Y.-C. Chen, A probabilistic approach for traditional EOQ model, J. Inform.
Optim. Sci. 24 (2003) 249–253.
[3] D. SetiyaWidodol, Dana Marsetiya Utama, Analisis Model Sustainable Eonomi
Order Quantity DenganMempertimbangkanEmisiKarbon Dan Batasan
Kapasitas Gudang UntukMenekan Total BiayaPersediaan, Teknik 40 (3)
(2019) 169–175.
[4] R.J. Duffin, Cost Minimization Problems Treated by Geometric Means, Oper.
Res. 10 (5) (1962) 668–675.
[5] R.J. Duffin, E.L. Peterson, C.M. Zener, Geometric programming – theory and
application, John Wiley, New York, 1967.
[6] K. Durai, A. Karpagam, A new membership function on hexagonal fuzzy
numbers, Int. J. Sci. Res. 5 (2016) 1129–1131.
[7] F. Harris, Operations and cost, AW Shaw Co., Chicago, 1913.
[8] C.H. Hsieh, Optimization of fuzzy production inventory models, Inf. Sci. 146
(2002) 29–40.
[9] T.R. Jefferson, C.H. Scott, Avenues of geometric programming. New Zealand,
Oper. Res. Int. J. 6 (1978) 109–136.
[10] K. Kalaiarasi, M. Sumathi, H. Mary Henrietta, A. Stanley Raj, Determining the
efficiency of fuzzy logic EOQ inventory model with varying demand in
comparison with Lagrangian and Kuhn-Tucker method through sensitivity
analysis, J. Model Based Res. 1 (3) (2020) 1–12.
[11] K. Kalaiarasi, M. Sumathi, H. Mary Henrietta, Optimizing EOQ using geometric
programming with varying fuzzy numbers by applying python, J. Critical Rev.
7 (18) (2020) 596–603.
[12] G.A. Kochenberger, Inventory models: optimization by geometric
programming, Decision Sci. 2 (2) (1971) 193–205.
[13] W.J. Lee, Optimal order quantities and prices with storage space and inventory
investment limitations, Comput. Ind. Eng. 26 (3) (1994) 481–488.
[14] G.S. Mahapatra, T.K. Mandal, G.P. Samanta, EPQ model with fuzzy coefficient of
objective and constraint via parametric geometric programming, IJOR 17 (4)
(2013) 436–448.
[15] K.S. Park, Fuzzy Set Theoretical Interpretation of economic order quantity, IEEE
Trans. Systems Man. Cybernet SMC 17 (1987) 1082–1084.
[16] E.L. Peterson, Geometric programming, Siam Rev. 18 (1974) 37–46.
[17] T.K. Roy, M. Maiti, A fuzzy EOQ model with demand-dependent unit cost under
limited storage capacity, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 99 (2) (1997) 425–432.
[18] S. Wang, B. Ye, A comparison between just-in-time and economic order
quantity models with carbon emissions, J. Cleaner Prod. 187 (2018) 662–671.
[19] X. Wang, W. Tang, R. Zhao, Random fuzzy EOQ model with imperfect quality
items, Fuzzy Optim Decis Making 6 (2) (2007) 139–153.
[20] R. Wilson, A scientific routine for stock control, Harvard Business Review 13
(1934) 116–128.
[21] L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inf. Control 8 (3) (1965) 338–353.
[22] H.-J. Zimmerman, Using fuzzy sets in operational research, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 13
(3) (1983) 201–216.
[23] C.M. Zener, A Mathematical aid in optimizing engineering design, Proc.
National Acad. Sci. USA 47 (4) (1961) 537–539.
[24] C.M. Zener, A further mathematical aid in optimizing engineering design, Proc.
National Acad. Sci. USA 48 (4) (1962) 518–522.