Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection

被引:45
|
作者
Hodgett, Richard Edgar [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Business, Maurice Keyworth Bldg, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词
Multi-criteria decision-making; Analytical hierarchy process (AHP); Multi-attribute range evaluations (MARE); ELECTRE III; Equipment Selection; MANAGEMENT; CRITERIA; DESIGN; AHP;
D O I
10.1007/s00170-015-7993-2
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Equipment selection is a complex task that requires the consideration of multiple criteria with different measurement units. A number of decision-making methods have been proposed for analysing equipment selection problems, each having their own distinctive advantages and limitations. Despite the number of decision-making techniques available, few comparative studies exist that evaluate two or more methods with a singular problem. This paper evaluates three multi-attribute decision-making methods for an equipment selection problem in the early stages of a chemical manufacturing process. A software framework which incorporates analytical hierarchy process (AHP), multi-attribute range evaluations (MARE) and ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalit, trois (ELECTRE III) was developed and distributed to a technology manager at Fujifilm Imaging Colorants Ltd (FFIC). The manager, within a team of nine people, examined the same decision problem using the three decision analysis methods. The results of the study are examined in respect to assessing each method's ability to provide accurate representations of the decision-makers' preferences and the ability to comprehend the uncertainty present. The decision-makers identified MARE as their preferred method, AHP was found to be comparatively more time-consuming and showed the highest variation of results while ELECTRE III was unable to provide a conclusive best result.
引用
收藏
页码:1145 / 1157
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Structure of multi-criteria decision-making
    Brugha, C
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 2004, 55 (11) : 1156 - 1168
  • [32] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Bipolar Fuzzy Environment
    M. A. Alghamdi
    Noura Omair Alshehri
    Muhammad Akram
    [J]. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 2018, 20 : 2057 - 2064
  • [33] Stochastic multi-criteria decision-making: an overview to methods and applications
    Celik, Erkan
    Gul, Muhammet
    Yucesan, Melih
    Mete, Suleyman
    [J]. BENI-SUEF UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF BASIC AND APPLIED SCIENCES, 2019, 8 (01)
  • [34] A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems
    Scott, James A.
    Ho, William
    Dey, Prasanta K.
    [J]. ENERGY, 2012, 42 (01) : 146 - 156
  • [35] SUBJECTIVE MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING
    ESHRAGH, F
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MAN-MACHINE STUDIES, 1980, 13 (01): : 117 - 141
  • [36] A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management
    Kabir, Golam
    Sadiq, Rehan
    Tesfamariam, Solomon
    [J]. STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING, 2014, 10 (09) : 1176 - 1210
  • [37] Stochastic multi-criteria decision-making: an overview to methods and applications
    Erkan Celik
    Muhammet Gul
    Melih Yucesan
    Suleyman Mete
    [J]. Beni-Suef University Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 8
  • [38] Vague Set Methods of Multi-criteria Fuzzy Decision-making
    Yan, Ruixia
    Zheng, Jianguo
    Wang, Xiang
    [J]. 2010 CHINESE CONTROL AND DECISION CONFERENCE, VOLS 1-5, 2010, : 658 - 661
  • [39] Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Bipolar Fuzzy Environment
    Alghamdi, M. A.
    Alshehri, Noura Omair
    Akram, Muhammad
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FUZZY SYSTEMS, 2018, 20 (06) : 2057 - 2064
  • [40] Wastewater Treatment and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Review
    Sharma, Tina
    Kumar, Anuj
    Pant, Sangeeta
    Kotecha, Ketan
    [J]. IEEE ACCESS, 2023, 11 : 143704 - 143720