Consensus among Multi-Criteria Decision-Making methods: Using methods as a voter

被引:1
|
作者
Hocaoglu, M. Fatih [1 ]
Tosun, Emre [1 ]
机构
[1] Istanbul Medeniyet Univ, Fac Engn & Nat Sci, Dept Ind Engn, TR-34700 Istanbul, Turkiye
关键词
Distance from optimum decision; Entropy criteria normalization; Group Decision Making; Max-Min weight normalization; Multi-Criteria Decision Making; Multi-Criteria Nozzle Selection; NORMALIZATION TECHNIQUES; SELECTION; TOPSIS;
D O I
10.17341/gazimmfd.1342315
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
This study offers a new approach that evaluates the decision order made by Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods (MCDM) with different normalization techniques as voters and combines them with a group decision-making method. In the proposed solution, each Multi-Criteria Decision Making Method calculatesits own election rank using different normalization techniques, and each rank is considered as one vote. Inthe next step, all these decision rankings are combined by considering the voting and ranking total weightvalues as weighting. The main purpose of developing this method is to increase consensus among MCDM.Two optimization models have been defined in determining the group decision, one based on number ofvotes optimization and the other based on cumulative weight optimization. To determine the final decisionorder, a distance calculation was made between the optimized decision and the decisions produced by & Ccedil;KKVY, and the order with the least distance was determined as the final decision.
引用
收藏
页码:103 / 120
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Drone selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Khan, Muhammad Sohaib
    Shah, Syed Irtiza Ali
    Javed, Ali
    Qadri, Nafees Mumtaz
    Hussain, Nadeem
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2021 INTERNATIONAL BHURBAN CONFERENCE ON APPLIED SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES (IBCAST), 2021, : 256 - 270
  • [2] A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Ceballos B.
    Lamata M.T.
    Pelta D.A.
    Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 2016, 5 (04) : 315 - 322
  • [3] Deconstruction plan assessment using multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Chen, Z
    Abdullah, A
    Anumba, C
    Li, H
    Xu, Q
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2005 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONSTRUCTION & REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, VOLS 1 AND 2: CHALLENGE OF INNOVATION IN CONSTRUCTION AND REAL ESTATE, 2005, : 465 - 469
  • [4] When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
    Saaty, Thomas L.
    Ergu, Daji
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2015, 14 (06) : 1171 - 1187
  • [5] A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems
    Scott, James A.
    Ho, William
    Dey, Prasanta K.
    ENERGY, 2012, 42 (01) : 146 - 156
  • [6] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Bipolar Fuzzy Environment
    M. A. Alghamdi
    Noura Omair Alshehri
    Muhammad Akram
    International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2018, 20 : 2057 - 2064
  • [7] Stochastic multi-criteria decision-making: an overview to methods and applications
    Celik, Erkan
    Gul, Muhammet
    Yucesan, Melih
    Mete, Suleyman
    BENI-SUEF UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF BASIC AND APPLIED SCIENCES, 2019, 8 (01)
  • [8] Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection
    Hodgett, Richard Edgar
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY, 2016, 85 (5-8): : 1145 - 1157
  • [9] Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection
    Richard Edgar Hodgett
    The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016, 85 : 1145 - 1157
  • [10] A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management
    Kabir, Golam
    Sadiq, Rehan
    Tesfamariam, Solomon
    STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING, 2014, 10 (09) : 1176 - 1210