A Multi-Criteria Decision-Support Framework for Evaluating Fog Computing Challenges and Service Models

Kamal Hossain Gazi; Aditi Biswas; Tripti Basuri; Srabani Guria Das; Fariba Azizzadeh

doi:10.67334/jemsci11202628

Authors

Kamal Hossain Gazi Department of Applied Mathematics, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology, West Bengal, 741249, India Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7179-984X
Aditi Biswas Department of Applied Mathematics, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology, West Bengal, 741249, India Author https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1972-6536
Tripti Basuri 1) Department of Applied Mathematics, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad University of Technology, West Bengal, 741249, India; 2) Uttar Dum Dum Vidyapith (Girls) Primary Section, Birati, India Author https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8701-9040
Srabani Guria Das Department of Basic Science, NSHM Knowledge Campus, Durgapur, West Bengal, India Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6055-7407
Fariba Azizzadeh Department of Management, Islamic Azad University, Piranshahr (Urmia), Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1288-1605

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.67334/jemsci11202628

Keywords:

Fog computing, Crisp number, MCDM, Entropy, CoCoSo

Abstract

Fog computing extends cloud computing by bringing processing, storage, and networking resources closer to end devices and data sources. This architecture can reduce latency, improve response times, decrease bandwidth consumption, and support applications that require rapid decision-making and the processing of large volumes of data. However, its adoption is affected by technological, operational, economic, and security-related challenges. This study develops a multi-criteria decision-making model to evaluate the principal challenges of fog computing and identify the most suitable fog computing service model. Seven criteria are considered: latency requirements, bandwidth efficiency, security and privacy, scalability and flexibility, energy efficiency, cost effectiveness, and network reliability. Six service models are evaluated as alternatives: Infrastructure-as-a-Service, Platform-as-a-Service, Software-as-a-Service, Data-as-a-Service, Communication-as-a-Service, and Edge-as-a-Service. The proposed framework integrates the Entropy and CoCoSo methods within a crisp decision-making environment. The Entropy method is used to determine objective criteria weights, while the CoCoSo method is employed to prioritize the alternatives. The results indicate that network reliability is the most influential criterion, with a weight of 0.2636, followed by energy efficiency with a weight of 0.2343. Security and privacy receives the lowest weight of 0.0360. Among the evaluated alternatives, Software-as-a-Service achieves the highest ranking, followed by Data-as-a-Service and Infrastructure-as-a-Service. Comparative analysis using the WASPAS and TOPSIS methods and sensitivity analysis under five scenarios are conducted to examine the robustness and stability of the findings. The results provide practical guidance for researchers, service providers, and policymakers involved in fog computing adoption and implementation across distributed, data-intensive, and time-sensitive computing environments in practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdali, T. N., Hassan, R., Aman, A. H. M., & Nguyen, Q. N. (2021). Fog computing advancement: Concept, architecture, applications, advantages, and open issues. IEEE Access, 9, 75961–75980. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3081770

Srirama, S. N. (2024). A decade of research in fog computing: Relevance, challenges, and future directions. Software: Practice and Experience, 54(1), 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.3243

Safitra, M. F., Lubis, M., Kusumasari, T. F., & Putri, D. P. (2024). Advancements in artificial intelligence and data science: Models, applications, and challenges. Procedia Computer Science, 234, 381–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2024.03.018

Premalatha, B., & Prakasam, P. (2024). A review on fog computing in 5G wireless technologies: Research challenges, issues and solutions. Wireless Personal Communications, 134, 2455–2484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-024-11061-y

Negi, A., Ranakoti, L., Singh, V., Wang, M., Fekete, G., Kumar, R., & Singh, T. (2026). Entropy-centroidous driven decision framework for optimal selection of oxide nanoparticles in solar still systems. Thermal Science and Engineering Progress, 74, 104728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsep.2026.104728

Şahin, M., & Deliktaş, D. (2026). Multi-criteria evaluation of wind turbines using entropy-based-TOPSIS and CoCoSo methods: Insights from a Turkish case study. Spectrum of Operational Research, 3(1), 339–351. https://doi.org/10.31181/sor31202650

Üsame Ekici, Akay, M. E., & Moslem, S. (2026). Determination of logistics center locations in Türkiye using AHP-based TOPSIS methods. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 37, 101967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2026.101967

Yan, H., & Wang, X. (2026). Ranking water-scarcity management strategies using the TOPSIS method. Scientific Reports, 16, 16993. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-48751-5

Keskin, B. (2026). Do the sustainable development goals matter? A multi-criteria performance assessment through COPRAS and gray relational analysis. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-07-2025-0690

Dritsas, E., & Trigka, M. (2025). A survey on the applications of cloud computing in the industrial internet of things. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 9(2), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc9020044

Cerullo, G., Guizzi, G., Massei, C., & Sgaglione, L. (2016). Efficient supply chain management: Traceability and transparency. In 2016 12th International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (pp. 750–757). https://doi.org/10.1109/SITIS.2016.124

Yıldırım, F., Yalman, Y., Bayındır, K. Ç., & Terciyanlı, E. (2025). Comprehensive review of edge computing for power systems: State of the art, architecture, and applications. Applied Sciences, 15(8), 4592. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15084592

Alsharif, M. H., Jahid, A., Kannadasan, R., Singla, M. K., Gupta, J., Nisar, K. S., Abdel-Aty, A., & Kim, M. (2025). Survey of energy-efficient fog computing: Techniques and recent advances. Energy Reports, 13, 1739–1763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2025.01.039

Movahedi, Z., Defude, B., & Hosseininia, A. M. (2021). An efficient population-based multi-objective task scheduling approach in fog computing systems. Journal of Cloud Computing, 10, 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13677-021-00264-4

Mutlag, A. A., Abd Ghani, M. K., Arunkumar, N. A., Mohammed, M. A., & Mohd, O. (2019). Enabling technologies for fog computing in healthcare IoT systems. Future generation computer systems, 90, 62-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.07.049

Jeyaraman, N., Jeyaraman, M., Yadav, S., Ramasubramanian, S., Balaji, S., Muthu, S., Lekha, C., & Patro, B. P. (2024). Applications of fog computing in healthcare. Cureus, 16(7), e64263. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.64263

Khaledian, N., Razzaghzadeh, S., Moazzami, S., & Kivi, P. N. (2025). TM-MOAOA: A two-stage task scheduling approach using TOPSIS and multi-objective Archimedes optimization in fog-cloud environment. Computing, 107, 155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00607-025-01513-z

Mehta, R., Sahni, J., Mahajan, S., & Khanna, K. (2025). A multi-objective optimization technique for scheduling real-time IoT applications in fog computing using approximate computations and TOPSIS. International Journal of Computing and Digital Systems, 17(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.12785/ijcds/1571064448

Ahmed, Z. R., Askar, S., Hussein, D. H., & Ibrahim, M. A. (2025). Fog computing challenges and opportunities in IoT networks: A review. Procedia Computer Science, 259, 1749–1764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2025.04.130

Alsadie, D. (2024). Artificial intelligence techniques for securing fog computing environments: Trends, challenges, and future directions. IEEE Access, 12, 151598–151648. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3463791

Li, D., Yu, C., Tan, Y., & Liu, J. (2024). Optimization method of fog computing high offloading service based on frame of reference. Mathematics, 12(5), 621. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12050621

Kumari, A., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2018). Fog computing for Healthcare 4.0 environment: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 72, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2018.08.015

Zavieh, H., Javadpour, A., Ja'fari, F., Sangaiah, A. K., & Słowik, A. (2024). Enhanced efficiency in fog computing: A fuzzy data-driven machine selection strategy. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 26, 368–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-023-01605-y (Duplikat ref. 16)

Alfakeeh, A. S., & Javed, M. A. (2023). Stable matching assisted resource allocation in fog computing based IoT networks. Mathematics, 11(17), 3798. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11173798

Hosseinzadeh, M., Azhir, E., Lansky, J., Mildeova, S., Ahmed, O. H., & Malik, M. H. (2023). Task scheduling mechanisms for fog computing: A systematic survey. IEEE Access, 11, 50994–51017. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3277826

Aliyu, F., Abdeen, M. A. R., Sheltami, T., Alfraidi, T., & Ahmed, M. H. (2023). Fog computing-assisted path planning for smart shopping. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 82, 38827–38852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-14926-9

Qian, J. (2022). Cognitive systems (Vol. 1, pp. 1–121). Technical University of Denmark.

Saurabh, & Dhanaraj, R. K. (2021). A review paper on fog computing paradigm to solve problems and challenges during integration of cloud with IoT. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2007(1), 012017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2007/1/012017

Cao, J., & Xu, F. (2022). Entropy-based fuzzy TOPSIS method for investment decision optimization of large-scale projects. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4381293

Trung, D. D., Dudic, B., Huong, D. M., Tham, N. T., & Ašonja, A. A. (2026). Evaluating innovation levels based on standard deviation of parameters and MCDM methods. Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 4(1), 77–97. https://doi.org/10.31181/sems41202666

Trung, D. D., Trang, B. T. T., Özçalici, M., & Ersoy, N. (2025). CURLIA: A streamlined aggregation method that elevates ranking accuracy in complex MCDM problems. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 1. https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR250815040T

Trung, D. D., Dudić, B., Dua, T. V., Thinh, H. X., & Son, N. H. (2026). Evaluating digital transformation effectiveness in select Vietnamese cities: A hybrid approach combining probability and SIWEC methods. IPSI Transaction on Internet Research, 22(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.58245/ipsi.tir.2601.03

Zhai, W., & Zheng, H. (2025). Advanced CoCoSo technique for interval neutrosophic MAGDM and applications to quality evaluation in higher education management. International Journal of Decision Support System Technology, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDSST.378431

Basuri, T., Gazi, K. H., Bhaduri, P., Das, S. G., & Mondal, S. P. (2026). Sustainability challenges for non-governmental funded higher educational institutions: A q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets coupled MCDM approach. Journal of Contemporary Decision Science, 3(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.67334/cds202630

Taghizadeh, A., Karaminezhad, K., Fakhri, N., Moghaddami, B., & Charkhian, D. (2025). Assessing innovation strategies in the digital economy through artificial intelligence-based criteria using CoCoSo method. Journal of Intelligent Decision Making and Granular Computing, 1(1), 237–255. https://doi.org/10.31181/jidmgc11202523

Ahmad, Q. A., Ashraf, S., Chohan, M. S., Batool, B., & Qiang, M. L. (2024). Extended CSF-CoCoSo method: A novel approach for optimizing logistics in the oil and gas supply chain. IEEE Access, 12, 75678–75688. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3390938

Fujita, T. (2026). Modeling reliability, ambiguity, and risk in information technology management using quaternion fuzzy and quaternion neutrosophic graphs. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Science, 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.67334/jemsci21202720

Mandal, S., Adhikari, D., Gazi, K. H., Giri, B. C., & Mandal, S. P. (2026). Extended q-rung orthopair hexagonal fuzzy MCDM technique and its application in medical diagnosis problem. RAIRO-Operations Research, 1. https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2026044

Gazi, K. H., Biswas, A., Mondal, S. P., & Ghosh, A. (2025). Challenges of remote sensing for crucial role in all phases of disaster management: An uncertain MCDM-based study. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, 5(1), 10–32. https://doi.org/10.56578/jemse050102

Lakshmi, K. V., & Kumara, K. N. U. (2025). Fuzzy MCDM techniques for portfolio selection in the post-COVID Indian mutual fund market: A comparative study of FAHP and entropy methods. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 16, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-024-04886-9

Pan, L. (2025). Assessing the level of energy security of China: Evidence from TOPSIS-entropy weight method. Problemy Ekorozwoju, 20(1), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.35784/preko.6808

Ren, Q., & Sun, M. (2025). Using AHP-entropy method to explore the influencing factors of spatial demand of EVs public charging stations: A case study of Jinan, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 491, 144779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.144779

Liang, F., Hong, J., & Zhang, X. (2025). Fault diagnosis of real-scenario battery systems in electric vehicles using the multi-scale fuzzy entropy algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 151, 110670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.110670

Kumar, R., & Bisht, D. C. (2023). Picture fuzzy entropy: A novel measure for managing uncertainty in multi-criteria decision-making. Decision Analytics Journal, 9, 100351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2023.100351

Öztürk, B. C., & Gökçen, H. (2023). Ranking strategic goals with fuzzy entropy weighting and fuzzy TOPSIS methods: A case of the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye. Applied Sciences, 13(14), 8060. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13148060

Thakur, P., Kizielewicz, B., Gandotra, N., Shekhovtsov, A., Saini, N., & Sałabun, W. (2022). The group decision-making using Pythagorean fuzzy entropy and the complex proportional assessment. Sensors, 22(13), 4879. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22134879

Kumar, R., Gandotra, N., & Suman. (2023). A novel Pythagorean fuzzy entropy measure using MCDM application in preference of the advertising company with TOPSIS approach. Materials Today: Proceedings, 80(3), 1742–1746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.05.497

Aldring, J., & Ajay, D. (2021). Critic-entropy based fuzzy decision making models: A systematic analysis. Journal of Computational Mathematica, 5(1), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.26524/cm100

Reddy, A. S., Kumar, P. R., & Raj, P. A. (2022). Entropy-based fuzzy TOPSIS framework for selection of a sustainable building material. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(7), 1194–1205. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2019.1683695

Garg, H., Agarwal, N., & Choubey, A. (2015). Entropy based multi-criteria decision making method under fuzzy environment and unknown attribute weights. Global Journal of Technology & Optimization, 6(3), 1000182. https://doi.org/10.4172/2229-8711.1000182

Thinh, H. X., Duc, D. V., & Bao, N. C. (2024). The effect of CoCoSo method on the ranks of alternatives: A case study of copper electrical wire selection. Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, 14(6), 18307–18315. https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.9063

Lai, H., Liao, H., Wen, Z., Zavadskas, E. K., & Al-Barakati, A. (2020). An improved CoCoSo method with a maximum variance optimization model for cloud service provider selection. Engineering Economics, 31(4), 411–424. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.31.4.24990

Liang, J. (2024). CoCoSo technique for teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Decision Support System Technology, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDSST.359179

Abdolshah, M. (2025). Comparative analysis of evaluation of business process management regarding digital transformation using the CoCoSo method. Iranian Journal of Information Processing Management, 40(3). https://doi.org/10.22034/jipm.2024.2037031.1704

Mukherjee, A. K., Gazi, K. H., Raisa, N., Momena, A. F., Mukherjee, S. B., Sobczak, A., Salahshour, S., Mondal, S. P., & Ghosh, A. (2025). Review of alternative ranking methods in multi-criteria decision analysis based on WASPAS and CoCoSo methodologies. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 1. https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR241215037M

Bhanutej, J., & Rao, V. K. (2024). Evaluating healthcare efficacy: An exploration of grey relational analysis and CoCoSo in MCDM framework. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(4), 7261–7276. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i4.2539

Xiao, J., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Enhanced TOPSIS-CoCoSo framework for multi-attribute decision-making with triangular fuzzy neutrosophic sets: "Effect evaluation of intelligent technology empowering physical education teaching" case. Soft Computing, 29, 1703–1717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-025-10411-7

Lai, H., Liao, H., Long, Y., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2022). A hesitant Fermatean fuzzy CoCoSo method for group decision-making and an application to blockchain platform evaluation. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 24, 2643–2661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-022-01319-7

Ersoy, N., Özçalıcı, M., & Trung, D. D. (2026). A hybrid MCDM approach for SDGs assessment of EU countries. Spectrum of Decision Making and Applications, 3(1), 164–186. https://doi.org/10.31181/sdmap31202637

Trang, B. T. T., Trung, D. D., & Turmanidze, R. (2025). A novel approach for criteria weighting to enhance ranking stability of alternatives for industrial equipment and material selection. Advanced Engineering Letters, 4(3), 118–133. https://doi.org/10.46793/adeletters.2025.4.3.2

Do, D. T., Özçalici, M., Tran, V. D., Hoang, X. T., Nguyen, C. B., & Ersoy, N. (2026). Comparative analysis of the simple additive weighting method and the deviation-based pairwise assessment ratio technique for material selection. Tribology and Materials, 1, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.46793/tribomat.202x.xxx

Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(3), 379–423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 57(9), 2501–2519. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0458

Caiza, G., Saeteros, M., Oñate, W., & Garcia, M. V. (2020). Fog computing at industrial level, architecture, latency, energy, and security: A review. Heliyon, 6(4), e03706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03706

Maswood, M. M. S., Rahman, M. R., Alharbi, A. G., & Medhi, D. (2020). A novel strategy to achieve bandwidth cost reduction and load balancing in a cooperative three-layer fog-cloud computing environment. IEEE Access, 8, 113737–113750. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3003263

Mouradian, C., Naboulsi, D., Yangui, S., Glitho, R. H., Morrow, M. J., & Polakos, P. A. (2018). A comprehensive survey on fog computing: State-of-the-art and research challenges. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 20(1), 416–464. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2017.2771153

Varshney, S., Sandhu, R., & Gupta, P. K. (2023). Cost-effective scheduling in fog computing: An environment based on modified PROMETHEE technique. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 29(4), 397–416. https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.90429

Valizadeh, P., Yaghmaee, M. H., & Sedaghat, Y. (2025). Reliability and bandwidth aware routing in SDN-based fog computing for IoT applications. Ad Hoc Networks, 172, 103803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2025.103803

Wang, Y., Qin, G., & Liang, Y. (2025). A reliability anomaly detection method based on enhanced GRU-Autoencoder for vehicular fog computing services. Computers & Security, 150, 104217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2024.104217

Khan, S., Shah, I. A., Ahmad, S., Khan, J. A., Anwar, M. S., & Aurangzeb, K. (2025). A comprehensive survey on multi-facet fog-computing resource management techniques, trends, applications and future directions. Expert Systems, 42(4), e70019. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.70019

Fujita, T. (2026). Modeling hierarchical and higher-order uncertainty in IT systems management using strong intuitionistic fuzzy hypergraphs and superhypergraphs. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Science, 1(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.67334/jemsci11202621

Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Antuchevičienė, J., & Zakarevičius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810

Hwang, C., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9