INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS COMMUNICATIONS & CONTROL

Online ISSN 1841-9844, ISSN-L 1841-9836, Volume: 19, Issue: 3, Month: June, Year: 2024
Article Number: 6458, https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458

CCC Publications

Optimizing Enterprise Marketing Project Portfolios Using Fuzzy Ant

Colony Optimization

Jian Mao

Jian Mao*
State Grid Hunan Electric Power CO.LTD
Changsha 410000, China
*Corresponding author: maojian20230408@163.com
andonie@cwu.edu

Abstract
Enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization is important for business competitiveness,
but involves multiple uncertain factors. An integrated model using fuzzy rules was proposed in
this paper to enhance ant colony optimization. The fuzzy ant colony algorithm effectively handled
ambiguity in project costs, returns, and risks when selecting an optimal portfolio of marketing
initiatives. Experiments demonstrated the algorithm efficiency in converging towards high-quality
solutions. Case studies indicated the model helped boost customer loyalty and profits through
tailored marketing strategies, outperforming conventional approaches. The fuzzy optimization pro-
vides an effective decision-making framework for enterprises to maximize marketing effectiveness.
Keywords: Enterprise; Marketing projects; Combination optimization; Ant colony fuzzy rules.

1 Introduction
With the increasingly fierce competition among enterprises, effective optimization of marketing
project portfolio has become an important strategy for enterprises to improve competitiveness and
gain market share. In the past few decades, machine learning played an important role in providing
enterprises with many optimization solutions [1, 2]. In machine learning, the optimization model of
enterprise marketing project portfolio based on metaheuristic algorithms has become an important
method. The optimization model of enterprise marketing project portfolio refers to maximizing the
marketing revenue of the enterprise by selecting the most effective marketing activity portfolio un-
der limited resource constraints. In traditional enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization, a
single-optimization model is often applied. However, the market constantly changes with customer
preferences, competitor strategies, and external economic conditions in practical applications. A
single-optimization model cannot meet complex decision-making needs. Accurate marketing project
portfolio decision-making can help companies quickly deal with market changes, accurately position
consumer needs, and increase market share and corporate profits. Therefore, uncertainty and fuzziness
need to be taken into account to provide more robust optimization results [3, 4, 5]. Ant Colony Opti-
mization (ACO) is a heuristic algorithm based on simulating ant behavior and information exchange.
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 2

It is based on the distributed computing of ant colonies and the tracking and updating mechanism
of pheromones, which simulates the intelligent behavior of ants in solving the optimal solution [6, 7].
When optimizing enterprise marketing project portfolio, ACO can flexibly adapt to different situa-
tions and decision objectives, which has good robustness and global optimization ability. In view of
this, first, the study designed an enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model based on
product marketing decisions. Then the pheromone update method of ACO algorithm was optimized
through fuzzy rules, and a Fuzzy Ant Colony Optimization (FACO) algorithm was designed. Finally,
this algorithm was applied to the designed model, providing effective marketing strategy guidance for
enterprises and improving their competitiveness. This algorithm can handle the optimization prob-
lem of enterprise marketing project portfolio more flexibly. Meanwhile, it can effectively deal with
the uncertainty and fuzziness of the market, providing enterprises with stable and efficient marketing
strategies. The innovation of the research lies in the introduction of fuzzy rules to dynamically adjust
the updating strategy of pheromones based on the traditional algorithm, thereby improving the al-
gorithm’s adaptability and global search ability in changing market environments. The contribution
of the research lies in providing enterprises with an effective marketing project portfolio optimization
strategy to cope with market changes. Meanwhile, it contributes to expanding the application of
machine learning algorithms in enterprise marketing and providing new ideas for subsequent related
research. This article mainly consists of five parts. The first part is the background of optimizing
enterprise marketing project portfolio. The second part is a review of the current research status of
enterprise marketing project optimization. The third part is research methodology, which first con-
structs an enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model, and then designs a combination
optimization model solution method based on the FACO algorithm. The fourth part is results and
discussion, including the performance analysis of the FACO algorithm and the analysis of the model
application effect. The fifth part summarizes the entire study and the shortcomings of the research.

2 Related works
In modern business environments, the combination optimization of enterprise marketing projects
is important. Enterprises make the best combination of various marketing factors based on their de-
velopment situations, which promotes effective coordination among them and maximizing the profits
of companies. However, the market is becoming more competitive. Various complex and uncertain
factors in the market environment may affect the implementation of marketing strategies. Therefore,
it has become a challenge to dynamically adjust the marketing program portfolio based on the cor-
porate resources and market demand to achieve maximum marketing effects. In recent years, many
scholars and business professionals have conducted numerous studies on optimizing the combination
of enterprise marketing projects. Mavrotas G and other researchers designed a novel method to simu-
late the uncertainty in R&D project portfolio selection. The method combined multi-criteria analysis,
mathematical programming, and Monte Carlo construction of decision wheels within the iterative
three-way framework. The results showed that this method provided a certainty for selecting and
rejecting projects [8]. Kock A et al. designed a project portfolio management system to improve
the performance of enterprise project portfolios, which increased the success of project portfolios by
improving the management quality of the project portfolio. The results showed that the system had
lower task complexity [9]. Rasoulzadeh M and other scholars designed a project portfolio optimization
method based on fuzzy data envelopment analysis model to quantify and measure enterprise marketing
project management. The method used linear methods and introduced fuzzy set theory to select the
optimal investment portfolio. The results showed that the method achieved good performance ranking
and evaluation capabilities [10]. Bai L and other researchers designed a dynamic evaluation model
based on system dynamics to analyze and optimize the returns of enterprise marketing projects. The
model took into account the implicit benefits generated by the synergistic effects between different
project components. The results showed that the model effectively strengthened the management of
project portfolio returns [11]. Baqeri K et al. designed a multi-objective model for selecting project
portfolios to determine the most objective alignment with objectives in enterprise marketing projects.
This model minimized risks in project execution by reflecting the stance, goals, and priorities of the
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 3

organization. The results showed that this method effectively improved the efficiency and quality [12].
Afshar M R and other scholars designed a project portfolio planning method using a mixed-integer
linear programming model to solve the problem of selecting and assigning the optimal subcontractor
in multiple construction projects. The method minimized project costs in different situations and
applied an algebraic modeling system for it. The results showed that the model was reliable [13].
Rasoulzadeh M and other scholars designed a multi-objective method based on the Markowitz
mean-variance model and cross-data envelopment analysis to solve the uncertainty in enterprise mar-
keting projects. The method combined Markowitz with the data envelopment model, and intuitive
fuzzy numbers were used to calculate the optimal combination. The results showed that this method
had high computational efficiency [14]. Burney SMA and other scholars designed a particle swarm
optimization algorithm based on fuzzy granularity clustering to effectively optimize the marketing mix
of enterprises. The algorithm formed clusters through fuzzy particle swarm optimization and granu-
larity calculation, and the benchmark index value of the algorithm was better than other methods [15].
Shi W et al. designed a co-evolutionary distribution estimation algorithm using divide and conquer
strategy to achieve the optimal allocation of marketing mix for enterprise projects. The algorithm
decomposed the group combination problem into individual problems to reduce the dimensions of the
optimization problem. The results showed that this method effectively solved combination optimiza-
tion problems [16]. Nieto A and other researchers designed a genetic simulation heuristic algorithm
to solve the optimization problem of marketing mix in enterprises with debt. It integrated Monte
Carlo simulation at different stages of the genetic algorithm to maximize the expectation under un-
certainty. The results showed that this algorithm had high computational efficiency [17]. Deliktaş
D designed a fuzzy multi-objective genetic algorithm based on cardinality constraints for decision-
making in portfolio optimization under fuzzy parameters. The algorithm optimized portfolios through
fuzzy multi-objective methods and mean variance sorting cardinality constraints. The results showed
that the algorithm had high computational accuracy [18]. Chou Y H et al. designed a weighted
optimization model based on trend ratio and sentiment index to optimize investment portfolios for
stable returns and reduce overall risk. The model took into account the volatility of the portfolio
comprehensively and automatically constructs them through quantum non-gates. The results showed
that the algorithm had high accuracy and efficiency [19].
In summary, a number of combinatorial optimization methods have been proposed by many schol-
ars in the enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization to improve resource allocation and
enhance marketing performance. However, these methods still suffer from high computational com-
plexity. Therefore, this study introduces fuzzy rules on the basis of traditional ACO algorithms and
designs a FACO algorithm for solving the combination optimization model of enterprise marketing
models to improve the optimization effect and efficiency.

3 Research methodology
This chapter mainly elaborates on the construction of an enterprise marketing project optimization
model based on the FACO algorithm. The combination optimization model was designed in the first
section, and the second section is the improvement and function design of the ACO algorithm.

3.1 Design of optimization model for enterprise marketing project portfolio

In complex market environments, enterprises not only need to consider the effective allocation of
internal resources, but also need to monitor market dynamics and behavioral changes. Therefore, it is
important for consumers to develop the optimal marketing strategy combination. The ability of enter-
prises to meet their set marketing goals can be maximized by implementing precise strategic planning
to improve the effectiveness of marketing activities and achieve the strategic goals of the enterprise,
thereby standing out in a fiercely competitive market environment [20, 21]. Meanwhile, multiple fac-
tors such as product, price, sales channels, and promotion need to be considered in the combination
optimization of enterprise marketing. The marketing mix of an enterprise requires comprehensive con-
sideration of different factors and optimization based on market demand and competition. Its specific
composition is shown in Figure 1.
[20-21]
. Meanwhile, multiple factors such as product, price, sales channels, and promotion need to
be considered in the combination optimization of enterprise marketing. The marketing mix of an4
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
enterprise requires comprehensive consideration of different factors and optimization based on
market demand and competition. Its specific composition is shown in Figure 1.

Product
Channel
Promotion
Price

Advantage

Competition

Fig.1 Enterprise marketing mix model

In Figure 1, the marketing Figure
mix1: is
Enterprise marketing
an organic whole. mix model need to comprehensively
Enterprises
consider different factors and optimize them based on market demand and competitive conditions.
In Figure
Therefore, the1,study
the marketing mix is an
first establishes anorganic whole.
objective Enterprises
function need to
for product comprehensively
portfolio consider
decision-making
different
in factors and
the marketing optimize
process basedthem basedfactors.
on these on market demand and
Meanwhile, competitive
different productconditions.
marketing Therefore,
decisions
can be divided into long-term and short-term decisions. The model expressioninfor
the study first establishes an objective function for product portfolio decision-making thelong-term
marketing
process based
decisions on these
is shown factors. (1).
in equation Meanwhile, different product marketing decisions can be divided into
long-term and short-term decisions. The model expression for long-term decisions is shown in equation
Z L =  ( pi − bi )X i −  φ qij λ (1)
(1). i i, j
ZL = (pi − bi )Xi − (1)
X X
ϕqij λ
In equation (1), Z represents thei objective function
i,j of long-term decision-making, pi
In equation (1), Z represents the objective function of long-term decision-making, pi represents
the market sales price of marketing products i, bi represents the additional cost required for each
marketing product, Xi represents the quantity of marketing products, ϕ represents the resources or
budget allocated for enterprise marketing projects, qij represents the demand for different projects in
the marketing project portfolio, j represents the j-th marketing project, λ represents a constant, and
its value range is within [0,1]. The method for short-term decision-making is shown in equation (2).

Zs = (pi − bi )Xi − (2)

X X
ϕQ
i i

In equation (2), Zs represents the objective function of short-term decision-making and Q repre-
sents the sales volume of the enterprise. However, it is not enough to only use long-term and short-term
decision models if marketing mix decisions are made solely based on time. Because the length of time
periods is a relatively fuzzy concept that is difficult to accurately measure. Meanwhile, both long-term
and short-term decision models do not consider the time variable. Therefore, the study combines the
two models into a mixed decision model, whose expression is shown in equation (3).
N J X
K
Y = (pi − Q0 )Xi − (3)
X X
ϕQ
j=1 j=1 k=1

In equation (3), Y represents the objective function of the mixed decision model, Q0 represents the
expected sales volume of the enterprise, J represents the total marketing projects, and k represents
the market demand for marketing products, k ∈ K. The enterprise marketing mix decision model is
shown in Figure 2.
 In equation (3), Y represents the objective function of the mixed decision model, Q0
represents the expected sales volume of the enterprise, J represents the total marketing projects,
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 5
and k represents the market demand for marketing products, k ∈ K . The enterprise marketing
mix decision model is shown in Figure 2.
Economic Technical
environment Marketing unit environment

Product

The public
Channel
Supplier

Price
Target

Promotion

Political Competitor Social

environment environment

Fig.2 Enterprise marketing mix model

Enterprise marketingFigure decision-making
2: Enterprise is marketing
not just a mix simple
modelstrategy formulation, but a
complex dynamic process. It mainly utilizes internal controllable factors such as marketing
strategies, marketing
Enterprise product pricing, promotional activities,
decision-making is not just etc.atosimple
adapt to the constantly
strategy changing
formulation, external
but a complex
environment. Faced with external uncontrollable factors such as market
dynamic process. It mainly utilizes internal controllable factors such as marketing strategies, product trends, competitors,
consumer demands, etc., enterprises need to demonstrate active and flexible response capabilities
pricing, promotional activities, etc. to adapt to the constantly changing external environment. Faced
to achieve transactions and achieve personal and corporate goals. However, it is necessary to
with external uncontrollable factors such as market trends, competitors, consumer demands, etc.,
eliminate the differences between the models to mix them. To address this issue, parameters in the
enterprises
model need to demonstrate
are defined active
to clarify the andinvestment
funding flexible response
for each capabilities to achieve
project in marketing, as transactions
expressed in and
achieve personal
equation (4). and corporate goals. However, it is necessary to eliminate the differences between
the modelsQto= mix Rij + them.
Wij To address this issue, parameters in the model are defined to clarify the
funding investment
J for each project in marketing, as expressed in equation (4).
 X q = R +W
 i ij u u
Q = Rij + Wij

j =1




0 ≤ Ru ≤ Rij (4)


 J
= +
 X
 X q R W


i ij u u
0 ≤ Wu ≤ Wij



j=1
(4)
X ≥ 0 0 ≤ R ≤ R


i 
 u ij


0 ≤ Wu ≤ Wij





Xi ≥ 0



In equation (4), Rij represents the funds available for marketing projects in Q, Wij represents
the project funds that cannot be freely allocated in Q, Ru represents the actual investment of funds
in enterprise marketing, and Wu represents the budget of funds in enterprise marketing. Different
enterprises can adjust parameters based on their financial situation. The next step is to calculate the
actual range of capital investment, expressed in equation (5).
 X
i
0,
 X
Xij qij ≤ Wij





i=1
Ru = (5)

 Xi
X Xi
X
X q − W , Xij qij > Wij



 ij ij ij
i=1 i=1

The study aims to avoid formulating overly idealized marketing plans by determining the actual
scope of investment. Therefore, the allocation of marketing funds can be better controlled and opti-
mized, the efficiency of marketing activities can be improved, and the strategic goals of the enterprise
can be achieved. The next step is to define the constraint conditions for the optimization model of
enterprise marketing mix, and its expression is shown in equation (6).

J = M ax
X
 ηij ξij
i,j (6)
ηij = Ti − τ ψij


 the enterprise can be achieved. The next step is to define the constraint conditions for the
optimization model of enterprise marketing mix, and its expression is shown in equation (6).
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 6
 J = Maxηijξij

 i, j (6)
ηij = Ti − τψ ij
In equation (6), ηij represents the profit coefficient in the marketing project, ξij represents the
penalty coefficient,
In equation and (6),itsηijvalue is 0 or
represents the1.profit representsinthe
Ti coefficient the target
marketingprofit of a ξmarketing
project, ij representsproject,
τ ψij represents the correlation and impact between different marketing projects,
the penalty coefficient, and its value is 0 or 1. Ti represents the target profit of a marketing and τ represents the
correlation factor. Finally, the penalty coefficient is constrained, and its constraint conditions are
project, τψ represents the correlation and impact between different marketing projects, and τ
shown in equationij (7).
represents the correlation factor. Finally, ξij ≤the|S|penalty
− 1, 2 ≤coefficient
|S| ≤ Xiis−constrained,
1 and its constraint (7)
XX
conditions are shown in equation (7).
i∈S j∈S

In equation
ξij ≤ S − 1, 2 ≤ S ≤ X i − 1 (7)
i∈S j∈S(7), S represents the total number of marketing project combinations. Under con-
straints, enterprises
In equationcan (7),flexibly allocatethemarketing
S represents total number budgets, respond
of marketing to market
project changes,Under
combinations. and adjust
their internal marketing
constraints, enterprises strategies. At this
can flexibly point,
allocate the construction
marketing of the to
budgets, respond enterprise marketing
market changes, and project
portfolio optimization
adjust their internal model is completed,
marketing strategies. and
At thisitspoint,
framework is shownofintheFigure
the construction 3. marketing
enterprise
project portfolio optimization model is completed, and its framework is shown in Figure 3.

Marketing plan Build objective Project portfolio

function optimization

Scope of funding Determine

Determine marketing investment marketing project
objectives obtained portfolio plan

Determine the
Long-term Short term values of each
decision decision-making parameter

Mixed Decision Build objective

Model function
Fig.3 The framework of optimization model for enterprise marketing project portfolio
3.2
Figure Solution
3: Thealgorithm
framework forofimproved ACO model
optimization combination optimization
for enterprise model project
marketing based on fuzzy
portfolio
rules
Due to the uncertainty and fuzziness of factors in the combination of enterprise marketing
3.2 Solution
strategies, italgorithm
is difficult tofor improved
describe ACO combination
them accurately optimization
using mathematical model
models. Therefore, the based
flexible
on optimization
fuzzy rules algorithms are used to find the optimal marketing project portfolio in
complex and uncertain environments to solve such problems. Common optimization methods
Due to the uncertainty and fuzziness of factors in the combination of enterprise marketing strate-
gies, it is difficult to describe them accurately using mathematical models. Therefore, the flexible
optimization algorithms are used to find the optimal marketing project portfolio in complex and
uncertain environments to solve such problems. Common optimization methods include greedy algo-
rithms, dynamic programming, genetic algorithms, simulated annealing algorithms, ACO algorithms,
etc. [22, 23, 24]. The ACO algorithm is adopted in this study to optimize the enterprise market-
ing project portfolio. However, traditional algorithms have the problems of easily falling into local
optima and time-consuming search process. Therefore, the study improves the search strategy of tra-
ditional algorithms and introduces fuzzy rules to optimize its information updating method to design
the FACO algorithm. The fuzzy logic effectively avoids algorithms falling into local optima early and
enhances their search ability. Compared with traditional algorithms, FACO can better understand the
uncertainty and fuzziness of space, and the search efficiency is improved. The process of traditional
ACO is shown in Figure 4.
 the search strategy of traditional algorithms and introduces fuzzy rules to optimize its information
updating method to design the FACO algorithm. The fuzzy logic effectively avoids algorithms
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
falling into local optima early and enhances their search ability. Compared with traditional 7
algorithms, FACO can better understand the uncertainty and fuzziness of space, and the search
efficiency is improved. The process of traditional ACO is shown in Figure 4.
Start Select the next direction
Output optimal solution
of movement

Initialization parameters

Update pheromones End

Y
Calculate fitness value

Reached maximum
Determine pheromones number of iterations?

Fig.4 The process of traditional ant colony algorithm

In Figure 4, Figure each parameter 4: The isprocess of traditional
first initialized, and thenantthecolony algorithm
movement path of the ant colony
is constructed. At the initial moment t0 = 0 , when the number of pheromones on each path is the
In same,
Figurethe4,state eachtransition
parameter is firstofinitialized,
probability ants from one andnode
then the movement
to another is shown path of the(8).
in equation ant colony is
constructed. At the initial moment t = 0, when the number of pheromones on each path is the same,
 γ (t ) α ε (t )  β0

the state transition probability ij   of ants
ij  ,from
j ∈ J kone
(i ) node to another is shown in equation (8).

Pi ,kj (t ) =   [ is ] [ is ]  [γ (t)]α [ε (t)]β
γ (t )
α
ε
β
 (8)
s∈J k ( i )
  P ij
 ij
, j ∈ Jk (i)
0, j ∉ J k (i ) P k (t) = [γis (t)]α [εis ]β (8)
i,j s∈J k (i)
k
In equation (8), Pi , j represents the / J (i) of ant k moving from node i to node j ,
0, j probability


∈

k
t represents thek time, γ ij represents pheromone concentration, ε ij represents the heuristic
In equation (8), Pi,j represents the probability of ant k moving from node i to node j, t represents
function, α represents an information heuristic factor, β represents the expected heuristic
the time, γij represents pheromone concentration, εij represents the heuristic function, α represents
factor, andheuristic
an information J k represents
factor,theβ set of nodes the
represents that expected
ants can choose in the
heuristic next step.
factor, and J αk represents
reflects the the set
of nodesrelative
that importance
ants can choose of pheromones.
in the next β reflects
step. αthe relativethe
reflects importance
relative of visibility, which
importance is the
of pheromones. β
reflectsdistance
the relative
between importance
nodes. Theoflarger α and
visibility, whichβ , is
thethe distance
greater between nodes.
the probability of ants The largertheα and β,
selecting
the greater
closest node to themselves. During the movement of ants, to prevent leaving too movement
the probability of ants selecting the closest node to themselves. During the many of
ants, topheromones
prevent leaving on thetoo many
path and pheromones on the path
masking the heuristic and masking
information, each the
ant heuristic information,
needs to update and each
process
ant needs the remaining
to update information
and process after completing
the remaining its traversal
information to completing
after improve searchits efficiency.
traversal The
to improve
search iterative
efficiency.formula
The for updating
iterative pheromones
formula is shown in
for updating equation (9).is shown in equation (9).
pheromones
γ ij (t + n) = (1 − ρ )γ ij (t ) +Δγ ij
 γ (t + n) = (1 − ρ)γij (t) + ∆γ
 m  ij

(9)
ij
 ij  ij

Δ γ = Δγ k
m
(9)

∆γij = ∆γij
X
k =1  k

In equation (9), ρ represents thek=1 pheromone volatilization factor, Δγ ij represents the
In increase
equationin(9), ρ represents
pheromones along the pheromone
the path volatilization
(i, j ) after factor, ∆γand
a search is completed, ij represents the increase
m represents the in
pheromones along of
total number the path
ants. The(i, j) after amethod
calculation searchforis the
completed,
increase inand m represents
information theintotal
is shown number of
equation
ants. The
(10).calculation method for the increase in information is shown in equation (10).

Q

∆γij Lk (10)
0


In equation (10), Q represents the total pheromones released by an ant cycle, and Lk represents
the total length of the path passed by the k-th ant. When ants pass through a path (i, j), ∆γij = LQk .
When ants do not pass through a path (i, j), ∆γij = 0. Then, the search strategy of the ACO
algorithm is improved. During the search, the ants traverse all nodes to directly generate feasible
solutions. The improved state transition probability formula is shown in equation (11).
xi · γi (t)

 ,i ∈ C
xk · γi (t)

 P
Pi = k∈C
(11)

0, i ∈

/C

 directly generate feasible solutions. The improved state transition probability formula is shown in
equation (11).
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
 xi ⋅ γ i (t ) 8
 x ⋅ γ (t ) , i ∈ C
Pi =   k i (11)
k ∈C

In equation (11),
0, i ∉ CPi represents the probability of ant state transition from one node to another
after optimization,
In equation and(11),
C represents the set
Pi represents the of available of
probability paths for ant
ant state movement.
transition from However,
one node the
to ACO
algorithm
another after optimization, and C represents the set of available paths for ant movement.find the
is prone to stagnation. All individuals find identical solutions and cannot further
solutionHowever,
space afterthe ACOsearch, whichisisprone
algorithm not conducive toAll
to stagnation. discovering
individualsbetter solutions.
find identical Therefore,
solutions and the
study introduces fuzzy rules to fuzzify input values to optimize the pheromone update
cannot further find the solution space after search, which is not conducive to discovering better method. The
fuzzy control framework
solutions. Therefore,is the
shown
studyin introduces
Figure 5. fuzzy rules to fuzzify input values to optimize the
pheromone update method. The fuzzy control framework is shown in Figure 5.
Fuzzy control

Given + Fuzzy Fuzzy Non fuzzification

A/D Compute D/A
value rules inference processing

Compute Sensor Controlled object Actuator

Fig.5 Fuzzy control framework diagram

Fuzzy logic is a mathematical methodcontrol
Figure 5: Fuzzy used to framework
deal with fuzzy or uncertain problems, which
diagram
uses fuzzy sets to study fuzzy thinking, language forms, and their laws [25-26]. In fuzzy logic, the
first step is to determine rules, which are usually represented by symbols, as shown in equation
Fuzzy logic is a mathematical method used to deal with fuzzy or uncertain problems, which uses
(12).
fuzzy sets toIFstudy
x is Ai fuzzy
AND ythinking,
is Bi THEN language
z is Ci forms, and their laws(12) [25, 26]. In fuzzy logic, the first
step is to determine rules, which are usually represented by symbols, as shown in equation (12).
In equation (12), x , y , and z represent variables. Ai , Bi , and Ci represent fuzzy sets
of each variable. Then, theIFquality x isAandi ANiteration
D y isofBthe i Tant
HEN colony
z isalgorithm
Ci solution are used as (12)
input variables and mapped to the corresponding fuzzy set. Then, a fuzzy subset of fuzzy variables
is formed(12),
In equation through x, y,membership functions,
and z represent and theAselection
variables. of triangle functions as membership
i , Bi , and Ci represent fuzzy sets of each variable.
functions is studied. Its expression is shown in equation (13).
Then, the quality and iteration of the ant colony algorithm solution are used as input variables and
mapped to the corresponding 0, x < afuzzy set. Then, a fuzzy subset of fuzzy variables is formed through
x − a
membership functions, and  the, aselection
≤ x ≤ b of triangle functions as membership functions is studied. Its
expression isy shown  b − a (13).
in equation
A ( x , a , b, c ) =  (13)
c − x ,b ≤ x ≤ c
0, x < a

c − a 
0, x > c


x−a



,a ≤ x ≤ b



b−a

y
In equation (13), A represents yA (x, a,the
b, c) = of the triangle function. a , b , and c represent (13)
value
c − x, b ≤ x ≤ c

three vertices of the triangle. The next step is  to ccustomize

 −a control rules based on the needs and
characteristics of enterprise marketing projects, and fuzzify them through mean fuzzy processing.

0, x > c
The calculation is shown in equation (14).
In equation (13), yA represents the value of the triangle function. a, b, and c represent three vertices
of the triangle. The next step is to customize control rules based on the needs and characteristics of
enterprise marketing projects, and fuzzify them through mean fuzzy processing. The calculation is
shown in equation (14).
y 2n
(a+b)
= (14)
x− b−a
2
In equation (14), the range of x is controlled within the interval [a, b], and the range of y after
fuzzification is [−n, n]. Finally, the number of solutions involved in pheromone updating is used as
the output of the fuzzy controller. The optimized pheromone updating strategy calculation method
is shown in equation (15).
L
γi (t + 1) = (1 − ρ)γi (t) + ∆γiθ (t) (15)
X

θ=1

In equation (15), L represents the number of solutions updated with pheromones, and θ represents
the number of optimal ants. The process of FACO algorithm is shown in Figure 6.
 L
γ i (t + 1) = (1 − ρ )γ i (t ) +  Δγ iθ (t ) (15)
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 θ =1 9
In equation (15), L represents the number of solutions updated with pheromones, and θ
represents the number of optimal ants. The process of FACO algorithm is shown in Figure 6.

Introducing
Fuzzy Rules
Start Population Calculate transition
Select Next Node
initialization probability

Update ant Using ant colony

positions and algorithm solutions
pheromones as input
Blurring Constructing Fuzzy
Subsets
N
Output the
Y
number of
solutions
Has the maximum number Output optimal
End
of iterations been reached? value
Fig.6 FACO algorithm flowchart
In Figure 6, the populationFigure 6: FACO
is first algorithm
initialized, flowchart
the state transition probability of the ants is
calculated, and the next node is selected based on the transition probability. Then, the solution of
the ACO6,algorithm
In Figure is used asisinput
the population firsttoinitialized,
the fuzzy logic
the system, and the ant probability
state transition position and ofpheromones
the ants is cal-
culated, and the next node is selected based on the transition probability. Then, thedetermine
are updated based on the established fuzzy rules. Finally, the solution is output to solution of the
whether it meets the termination condition. If it does, the optimal solution is output. If it does not,
ACO algorithm is used as input to the fuzzy logic system, and the ant position and pheromones are
the iteration continues.
updated4. based
Resultson
andthe established fuzzy rules. Finally, the solution is output to determine whether it
discussion
meets the termination
This chapter condition. If it does,
mainly introduces the optimal solution
the experimental is output.
results analysis of anIfenterprise
it does not, the iteration
marketing
continues.
project optimization model based on the FACO algorithm. The first section is the performance
analysis of the algorithm, and the second section is the application effect analysis of the
optimization model.
4 Results and analysis
4.1 Performance discussionof FACO algorithm
The study first used grid search to calculate the optimal and average solutions under different
Thisinformation
chapter mainly introduces
heuristic factors andtheexpected
experimental results
heuristic factorsanalysis of andataset
in the Eil51 enterprise marketing
to determine the project
optimization model
parameter based
values. The on performance
the FACO algorithm.
of the designed The first section
enterprise is the performance
marketing analysis of
project portfolio
the algorithm, and model
optimization the second section The
was verified. is the application
grid effectsearched
search method analysisfor of the optimization
all possible model.
parameter
combinations by specifying a candidate value list of hyperparameters. Each set of parameters was
trained and evaluated. Finally, the parameter combination with the best performance was selected
4.1 Performance analysis of FACO algorithm
as the final hyperparameter of the model. The results are shown in Figure 7.
The study first used grid search to calculate the optimal and average solutions under different
information heuristic factors and expected heuristic factors in the Eil51 dataset to determine the
parameter values. The performance of the designed enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization
model was verified. The grid search method searched for all possible parameter combinations by
specifying a candidate value list of hyperparameters. Each set of parameters was trained and evaluated.
Finally, the parameter combination with the best performance was selected as the final hyperparameter
of the model. The results are shown in Figure 7.

0.86 1.05
Optimal value Average value Optimal value Average value
0.84 1.00
0.82
0.95
Optimal solution
Optimal solution

0.80
0.90
0.78
0.85
0.76
0.80
0.74
0.72 0.75

0.70 0.70
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Different α value Different β value
(a) Different α Optimal solution under value (b) Different β Optimal solution under value
Fig.7 Optimization curve of improved GOA algorithm in four test functions
FigureFigure
From 7 (a), when curve
7: Optimization the information heuristic
of improved GOAfactor α = 1.25
algorithm , the test
in four minimum value of
functions
the optimal solution was 0.72 and the average solution was 0.74. In Figure 7 (b), when the
expected heuristic factor β = 3.0 , the minimum value of the optimal solution was 0.71, and the
average solution was 0.74. The above results indicated that the solution performance of the design
algorithm was good. The optimal parameter values were determined, α = 1.25 , and β = 3.0 .
 0.72 0.75

0.70 0.70
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 10
Different α value Different β value
(a) Different α Optimal solution under value (b) Different β Optimal solution under value
Fig.7 Optimization curve of improved GOA algorithm in four test functions
From Figure 7 (a), 7when
From Figure the information
(a), when the information heuristic
heuristicfactor
factor αα== 1.25
1.25,, the
theminimum
minimum value
value of of the
optimalthesolution
optimal was 0.72 was
solution and0.72
the and
average solutionsolution
the average was 0.74. In Figure
was 0.74. 7 (b),
In Figure when
7 (b), thethe
when expected
heuristic factor heuristic
expected β = 3.0, factor
the minimum
β = 3.0 , value of the optimal
the minimum value ofsolution wassolution
the optimal 0.71, andwasthe average
0.71, and thesolution
was 0.74. The solution
average above results indicated
was 0.74. thatresults
The above the solution
indicatedperformance of the
that the solution design algorithm
performance was good.
of the design
The optimal parameter
algorithm was good. values
The were determined,
optimal parameter α = 1.25,
values wereand β = 3.0. The
determined, next, step
α = 1.25 and β was to .select a
= 3.0
set of data in the
The next Eil51
step was dataset
to select as theoftest
a set dataset. It Eil51
in the was divided into
dataset as the6test
categories.
set. It wasThe loss into
divided curve6 of the
FACO categories.
algorithm The wasloss
calculated. This
curve of the algorithm
FACO waswas
algorithm compared with
calculated. Thisthe traditional
algorithm algorithm. The
was compared
convergence
with thecurves of thealgorithm.
traditional two algorithms are shown
The convergence in Figure
curves 8. algorithms are shown in Figure
of the two
8.
Test set 1 Test set 2 Test set 1 Test set 2
Test set 3 Test set 4 Test set 3 Test set 4
1.5 0.55
Test set 5 Test set 6 Test set 5 Test set 6
1.4 0.50
1.3
0.45
1.2
0.40

Loss
Loss

1.1
0.35
1.0
0.30
0.9
0.8 0.25

0.7 0.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Iterations Iterations
(a) Convergence Curve of ACO Algorithm (b) Convergence Curve of FACO Algorithm
Fig.8 Optimization curve of improved AOC algorithm in four test functions
FigureFigure
From 8, in test setcurve
8: Optimization 1, the of minimum
improved lossAOC
valuealgorithm
of the traditional
in fouralgorithm was 1.32,
test functions
and the minimum loss value of the improved algorithm was 0.47. In test set 2, the minimum loss
values for the traditional algorithm were 1.15 and the minimum loss values for the improved
From Figure 8, in test set 1, the minimum loss value of the traditional algorithm was 1.32, and
algorithm were 0.43, respectively. In test set 3, the loss value of the traditional algorithm when the
the minimum
loss curveloss value stability
reached of the improved
was 0.97, and algorithm
the loss was
value0.47.
of theInimproved
test setalgorithm
2, the minimum loss values
when the loss
for the curve
traditional
tended to flatten was 0.37. In test set 4, the loss value of the traditional algorithm when the were
algorithm were 1.15 and the minimum loss values for the improved algorithm
0.43, respectively. In test
loss curve tended set 3, the
to stabilize wasloss
0.80,value
and ofthethe
losstraditional
value of thealgorithm when thewhen
improved algorithm loss the
curve
lossreached
stability wasreached
curve 0.97, and the loss
stability was value
0.29. Inof test
thesetimproved algorithm
5, the loss value of thewhen the lossalgorithm
traditional curve tended
when theto flatten
loss curve
was 0.37. In test tended
set 4,to flatten
the loss wasvalue
0.77, of
andthethe traditional
loss value ofalgorithm
the improved algorithm
when when
the loss the loss
curve tended to
curve
stabilize wastended
0.80, andto flatten was value
the loss 0.24. Inoftest
theset 6, the minimum
improved algorithmloss when
value of
thetheloss
traditional algorithm
curve reached stability
was 0.76, and the minimum loss value of the improved algorithm was
was 0.29. In test set 5, the loss value of the traditional algorithm when the loss curve tended 0.23. The above results
to flatten
indicate that the improved algorithm FACO performed well on different test sets, and its loss
was 0.77, and the loss value of the improved algorithm when the loss curve tended to flatten was 0.24.
curve did not show significant fluctuations, proving its good stability. The Kaggle dataset is an
In test open-source
set 6, the minimum
dataset thatlosscontains
value of the real-world
many traditionaldataalgorithm
related towas 0.76, and
marketing. the minimum
Therefore, loss value
the study
of the improved
selected marketing data from 6 e-commerce platforms in a certain month in the Kaggle dataset, FACO
algorithm was 0.23. The above results indicate that the improved algorithm
performed well
trained theon different
FACO test sets,
algorithm, and its loss
and conducted errorcurve did The
analysis. notresults
show are
significant
shown influctuations,
Table 1. proving
its good stability. The Kaggle dataset is an open-source
Table.1 Error analysis of two dataset that contains many real-world data
algorithms
related to marketing.
Test set Therefore, the study
Actual valueselected marketing
Analog data
valuefrom 6 e-commerce Error (%) platforms in a
certain month in the Kaggle dataset, trained the FACO algorithm, and conducted error analysis. The
results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Error analysis of two algorithms

Test set Actual value Analog value Error (%)
Platform 1 0.31 0.3923 0.265
Platform 2 0.22 0.2376 0.080
Platform 3 0.10 0.1023 0.002
Platform 4 0.07 0.0796 0.137
Platform 5 0.13 0.1459 0.122
Platform 6 0.08 0.0943 0.179

From Table 1, in the six test sets, the error range of the test set was 0.002%-0.265%. Platform
1 had the highest error value, with an error of 0.265%, and platform 3 had the lowest error value,
with an error of 0.002%. The above results indicated that the FACO algorithm had a small error in
predicting enterprise marketing project portfolios and provided more accurate results.
 Platform 3 0.10 0.1023 0.002
Platform 4 0.07 0.0796 0.137
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
Platform 5 0.13 0.1459 0.122 11
Platform 6 0.08 0.0943 0.179
From Table 1, in the six test sets, the error range of the test set was 0.002%-0.265%. Platform
1 had the highest
5 Analysis of error
thevalue, with an error
practical of 0.265%, and platform
application effect3 had
of the lowest error value,
marketing project
with an error of 0.002%. The above results indicated that the FACO algorithm had a small error in
portfolio optimization model
predicting enterprise marketing project portfolios and provided more accurate results.
4.2 Analysis of the practical application effect of marketing project portfolio optimization
Themodel
study first calculated the risk results of the model under different profit preferences to verify
the effectiveness of designing
The study an enterprise
first calculated the risk marketing project
results of the model portfolio modelprofit
under different in practical applications.
preferences to
Meanwhile,
verifythe
the risk level of marketing
effectiveness of designingprojects was calculated
an enterprise from three
marketing project aspects:
portfolio model product,
in practicalchannel,
and promotion. The
applications. results are
Meanwhile, theshown in Figure
risk level 9.
of marketing projects was calculated from three aspects:
product, channel, and promotion. The results are shown in Figure 9.
Product
0.86 45
0.8 Channel
10
Promotion
0.47 35
Risk value

0.6

Z1
30
0.4 15

0.2

0.0
0.00 0.15 0.30 0.45 0.60 0.75
Income preference
(a) Risk outcomes (b) Risk level
Fig9 Risk outcomes and risk levels
From Figure 9 (a), as the preference
Figure 9: Risk foroutcomes
returns increased,
and risk thelevels
risk value showed a fluctuating
trend. When the return preference was 0.15, the maximum risk value was 0.86. When the return
preference was 0.375, the minimum risk value was 0.47. The designed enterprise marketing
From Figure 9 (a), as the preference for returns increased, the risk value showed a fluctuating
project portfolio model effectively evaluated the level of risk under different profit preferences. In
trend. Figure
When9 the (b), return
the risk preference was 0.15,
levels of products, the maximum
channels, risk were
and promotions valueevenly
was 0.86. When
distributed andthe
no return
preference
clustering occurs. When formulating a marketing project portfolio, it was necessary to fully project
was 0.375, the minimum risk value was 0.47. The designed enterprise marketing
portfolio model the
consider effectively
risks inevaluated
different the leveland
aspects of risk under
reduce thedifferent
overall profit
risk by preferences. In Figure 9 (b),
allocating resources
the riskreasonably.
levels of products,
The abovechannels, and promotions
results indicated that whenwere evenly distributed
formulating and no clustering
marketing strategies, enterprises occurs.
needed to balance
When formulating the relationship
a marketing projectbetween
portfolio,returns
it wasandnecessary
risks and find a balance
to fully pointthe
consider to risks
maximize
in different
returns and control risks. Enterprises often attract customers through a series
aspects and reduce the overall risk by allocating resources reasonably. The above results indicated of marketing project
strategies.
that when The study
formulating adopted three
marketing strategies:
strategies, promotion,needed
enterprises improving quality, and
to balance the expanding
relationship salesbetween
channels. These three strategies were combined in pairs to generate six marketing mix strategies.
returns and risks and find a balance point to maximize returns and control risks. Enterprises often
Then, customer loyalty was verified from three aspects: service, channel, and quality, which was
attractcompared
customerswith through a seriesstrategy.
the original of marketing
Meanwhile,project thestrategies.
P-values ofThe studystrategies
different adopted compared
three strategies:
promotion,
with the original strategy were calculated through t-test to verify the difference between thesecombined
improving quality, and expanding sales channels. These three strategies were two in
pairs tostrategies.
generateThe six significance
marketing mix strategies.
test standard wasThen, customer
set to 0.05. loyalty
If P<0.05, was verified
it indicates from
that the three aspects:
difference
service,ischannel, andsignificant.
statistically quality, which was compared
If P>0.05, it indicateswith thedifference
that the original strategy. Meanwhile,
is not statistically the P-values
significant
of different
and isstrategies
comparable. compared
The resultswith
are the
shownoriginal
in Table strategy
2. were calculated through t-test to verify the
difference betweenTable.2 Customer
these two loyaltyThe
strategies. based on different
significance marketing
test standardmix wasstrategies
set to 0.05. If P<0.05, it
Marketing Give service
indicates that the difference is statistically significant. If P>0.05, it indicates thatLoyalty
the difference is
Channel Quality P value
mix to
not statistically significant and is comparable. The results are shown in Table 2.
Promotion 96 86 86 <0.05 86
Expand
91 85 89 <0.05 86
channels Table 2: Customer loyalty based on different marketing mix strategies
Improving Marketing mix Give service to Channel Quality P value Loyalty
Promotion 91 89 96 86 86 <0.05
86 <0.0591 86
quality
Expand channels 91 85 89 <0.05 86
Promotion 96
Improving quality 89 91 84 89 <0.05
86 <0.05136 91
Promotion and quality improvement 96 89 84 <0.05 136
Improving quality and expanding channels 86 91 91 <0.05 220
Promotion and channel expansion 96 86 91 <0.05 151
Original strategy 90 85 85 / 80

From Table 2, the P-values between different strategies and the original strategy after t-test were
all less than 0.05, indicating that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant.
The customer loyalty levels when using 7 marketing mix strategies were 86, 86, 91, 136, 220, 151,
and 80, respectively. The customer loyalty of the three strategies of promotion, improving quality,
and expanding channels, as well as their combination strategies, was higher than the original strat-
 strategy
From Table 2, the P-values between different strategies and the original strategy after t-test
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458
were all less than 0.05, indicating that the difference between the two groups was statistically 12
significant. The customer loyalty levels when using 7 marketing mix strategies were 86, 86, 91,
136, 220, 151, and 80, respectively. The customer loyalty of the three strategies of promotion,
improving quality,
egy. Meanwhile, and expanding
when there channels,
was quality as well as
improvement in their combination
marketing strategies,
strategies, was higher
customer loyalty was
than the original strategy. Meanwhile, when there was quality improvement
significantly higher than marketing strategies that did not improve quality. The above results indi- in marketing
strategies, customer loyalty was significantly higher than marketing strategies that did not improve
cated that customers paid more attention to improving product quality, indicating that enterprises
quality. The above results indicated that customers paid more attention to improving product
should quality,
focus onindicating
product that
quality when formulating
enterprises should focus marketing
on product strategies,
quality when and a combination
formulating of multiple
marketing
strategies could be used to attract and retain customers. Finally, the designed model
strategies, and a combination of multiple strategies could be used to attract and retain customers. was evaluated
based on the relationship between net profit and cumulative funds in the enterprise
Finally, the designed model was evaluated based on the relationship between net profit and project marketing
portfolio. The results
cumulative funds of
in the traditional
the enterprise ACOmarketing
project algorithm-based enterprise
portfolio. The marketing
results of project
the traditional ACO portfolio
algorithm-based
optimization model wereenterprise marketing
compared to theproject portfolio
designed model.optimization
The results model
arewere
shown compared to the
in Figure 10.
designed model. The results are shown in Figure 10.
1050 1400
Marketing net profit (Millions of dollars)

Marketing net profit (Millions of dollars)

900 1200

750 1000

600 800

450 600

300 400

150 200

-2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000
-150 -200
Accumulated funds (Millions of dollars) Accumulated funds (Millions of dollars)
(a) ACO algorithm (b) FACO algorithm
Fig.10 The relationship between net profit and accumulated funds
FromFigure
Figure10:10 (a),
Thethe net profit obtained
relationship between from
netmarketing
profit andranged from -150funds
accumulated million to 750
million US dollars in the enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model based on the
traditional ACO algorithm. In Figure 10 (b), the net profit obtained from marketing ranged from
From Figure 10 (a), the net profit obtained from marketing ranged from -150 million to 750 million
-100 million to 120 million US dollars in the enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization
US dollars
modelinbased
the enterprise
on the FACO marketing
algorithm.project portfolio
Under the optimization
same investment model the
conditions, based on theoftraditional
net profit the
ACO algorithm. In Figure 10 (b), the net profit obtained from marketing ranged
enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model based on the FACO algorithm from -100was
million to
120 million
significantly higher than that of the enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model on the
US dollars in the enterprise marketing project portfolio optimization model based
FACO based
algorithm.
on the Under the algorithm.
traditional same investment
The above conditions, the net
results indicate thatprofit of the enterprise
the improved marketing
algorithm was
projectmore precise
portfolio and effectivemodel
optimization in project
basedselection
on theandFACO resource allocation,
algorithm was which helped enterprises
significantly higher than that
make wiser marketing
of the enterprise decisions and improve
project their profitability.
portfolio optimization model based on the traditional algorithm.
5. Conclusion
The above results indicate that the improved algorithm was more precise and effective in project
In conclusion, the FACO model constructed in this paper provided an efficient and practical
selection and resource allocation, which helped enterprises make wiser decisions and improve their
method for enterprises to optimize marketing project portfolios under uncertainty. The integration
profitability.
of fuzzy rules to guide the algorithm optimization proves highly effective. This approach can help
managers select the ideal combinations of marketing initiatives that maximize expected returns
5.1 given acceptable levels of risk and budget constraints. The fuzzy optimization technique can
Conclusion
enhance the competitiveness and profitability of enterprises across industries. Adaptive parameter
In conclusion, the FACO model constructed in this paper provided an efficient and practical method
for enterprises to optimize marketing project portfolios under uncertainty. The integration of fuzzy
rules to guide the algorithm optimization proves highly effective. This approach can help managers
select the ideal combinations of marketing initiatives that maximize expected returns given acceptable
levels of risk and budget constraints. The fuzzy optimization technique can enhance the competi-
tiveness and profitability of enterprises across industries. Adaptive parameter tuning and ensemble
techniques can be explored to further improve model robustness.

References
[1] Raad N, Shirazi M, Ghodsypour S. Selecting a portfolio of projects considering both optimization
and balance of sub-portfolios. Journal of Project Management, 2020, 5(1): 1-16.

[2] Banihashemi S A, Khalilzadeh M. Performance Evaluation Optimization Model with a Hybrid

Approach of NDEA-BSC and Stackelberg Game Theory in the Presence of Bad Data. Economic
Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 2023, 57(2): 293-312.
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 13

[3] Mohagheghi V, Mousavi S M. A new multi-period optimization model for resilient-sustainable

project portfolio evaluation under interval-valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets with a case study. In-
ternational Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 2021, 12(12): 3541-3560.

[4] Sun H. Optimizing Manufacturing Scheduling with Genetic Algorithm and LSTM Neural Net-
works. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 2023, 22(3): 508-519.

[5] Luo N, Yu H, You Z, Li Y, Zhou T, Jiao Y, Qiao S. Fuzzy logic and neural network-based risk
assessment model for import and export enterprises: A review. Journal of Data Science and
Intelligent Systems, 2023, 1(1): 2-11.

[6] Aurelija Burinskienė, Edita Leonavičienė. Risk Management in International Business Develop-
ment Projects. Journal of Service, Innovation and Sustainable Development, 2022, 3(2) : 51-64.

[7] Ortiz-Cerezo L, Carsteanu A, Clempner J B. Optimal Constrained Portfolio Analysis for In-
complete Information and Transaction Costs. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics
Studies and Research, 2022, 56(4): 107-121.

[8] Mavrotas G, Makryvelios E. Combining multiple criteria analysis, mathematical programming

and Monte Carlo simulation to tackle uncertainty in Research and Development project portfolio
selection: A case study from Greece. European Journal of Operational Research, 2021, 291(2):
794-806.

[9] Kock A, Schulz B, Kopmann J, Gemünden, H. G. Project portfolio management information

systems’ positive influence on performance–the importance of process maturity. International
journal of project management, 2020, 38(4): 229-241.

[10] Rasoulzadeh M, Fallah M. An overview of portfolio optimization using fuzzy data envelopment
analysis models. Journal of fuzzy extension and applications, 2020, 1(3): 180-188.

[11] Bai L, Sun Y, Shi H, Shi C, Bai J, Han X. Dynamic assessment modelling for project portfolio
benefits. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2022, 73(7): 1596-1619.

[12] Baqeri K, Mohammadi E, Gilani M. Multi objective project portfolio selection. Journal of Project
Management, 2019, 4(4): 249-256.

[13] Afshar M R, Shahhosseini V, Sebt M H. Optimal sub-contractor selection and allocation in a

multiple construction project: Project portfolio planning in practice. Journal of the Operational
Research Society, 2022, 73(2): 351-364.

[14] Rasoulzadeh M, Edalatpanah S A, Fallah M, Najafi S E. A multi-objective approach based on

Markowitz and DEA cross-efficiency models for the intuitionistic fuzzy portfolio selection problem.
Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 2022, 5(2): 241-259.

[15] Burney S M A, Jilani T, Tariq H, Asim Z, Amjad U, Mohammad S S. A portfolio optimiza-

tion algorithm using Fuzzy granularity based clustering. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial
Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2019, 10(2): 159-173.

[16] Shi W, Chen W N, Kwong S, Zhang J, Wang H, Gu T, Zhang J. A coevolutionary estimation of

distribution algorithm for group insurance portfolio. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics: Systems, 2021, 52(11): 6714-6728.

[17] Nieto A, Serra M, Juan A A, Bayliss C. A GA-simheuristic for the stochastic and multi-period
portfolio optimisation problem with liabilities. Journal of Simulation, 2023, 17(5): 632-645.

[18] Deliktaş D, Ustun O. Multi-objective genetic algorithm based on the fuzzy MULTIMOORA
method for solving the cardinality constrained portfolio optimization. Applied Intelligence, 2023,
53(12): 14717-14743.
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458 14

[19] Chou Y H, Jiang Y C, Hsu Y R, Kuo S Y, Kuo S Y. A weighted portfolio optimization model
based on the trend ratio, emotion index, and angqts. IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in
Computational Intelligence, 2021, 6(4): 867-882.

[20] Wang W, Gu G, Sun F, Hu X. An Optimization Approach for pricing of Discrete European Call
options Based on the Preference of Investors. Tehnički vjesnik, 2023, 30(3), 760-764.

[21] Wu Z, Liao H, Lu K, Zavadskas E K. Soft computing techniques and their applications in intelli-
gent industrial control systems: A survey. International journal of computers communications &
control, 2021, 16(1): 1-28.

[22] Kumar V T R P, Arulselvi M, Sastry K B S. Comparative Assessment of Colon Cancer Classifica-

tion Using Diverse Deep Learning Approaches. Journal of Data Science and Intelligent Systems,
2023, 1(2): 128-135.

[23] Oliveira M S. Leal F, Perelira T F, Montevechi J A B. Faciliated Discrete Event Simulation for
Industrial Processes: a Critical Analysis. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 2022,
21,(3): 395-404.

[24] Xiong L, Su X, Qian H. Supplier Selection Model Based on D Numbers and Transformation Func-
tion. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS COMMUNICATIONS & CONTROL,
2022, 17(5).

[25] Zhang H, Tian R, Wang Q, Wu D. A Dynamic Credit Evaluation Approach Using Sensitivity-
Optimized Weights for Supply Chain Finance. Tehnički vjesnik, 2023, 30(6), 1951-1958.

[26] Omar Nwilaty, Mhd.Yaman Alghadban, Malek Hamadah dit Beltrkmani, Munzer Al Sabsabi &
Serene Dalati. Sustain It: A Guidance Research for Startup Business for Sustainable Recycling
Enterprise. Journal of Service, Innovation and Sustainable Development, 2023, 4(1): 72-86.

Copyright ©2022 by the authors. Licensee Agora University, Oradea, Romania.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Journal’s webpage: http://univagora.ro/jour/index.php/ijccc/

This journal is a member of, and subscribes to the principles of,

the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
https://publicationethics.org/members/international-journal-computers-communications-and-control

Cite this paper as:

Mao, J. (2024). Optimizing Enterprise Marketing Project Portfolios Using Fuzzy Ant Colony
Optimization, International Journal of Computers Communications & Control, 19(3), 6458, 2024.
https://doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2024.3.6458