IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i14p2269-d1439205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Centroidous Method for Determining Objective Weights

Author

Listed:
  • Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič

    (Department of Information Technologies, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, 10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

When using multi-criteria decision-making methods in applied problems, an important aspect is the determination of the criteria weights. These weights represent the degree of each criterion’s importance in a certain group. The process of determining weight coefficients from a dataset is described as an objective weighting method. The dataset considered here contains quantitative data representing measurements of the alternatives being compared, according to a previously determined system of criteria. The purpose of this study is to suggest a new method for determining objective criteria weights and estimating the proximity of the studied criteria to the centres of their groups. It is assumed that the closer a criterion is to the centre of the group, the more accurately it describes the entire group. The accuracy of the description of the entire group’s priorities is interpreted as the importance, and the higher the value, the more significant the weight of the criterion. The Centroidous method suggested here evaluates the importance of each criterion in relation to the centre of the entire group of criteria. The stability of the Centroidous method is examined in relation to the measures of Euclidean, Manhattan, and Chebyshev distances. By slightly modifying the data in the original normalised data matrix by 5% and 10% 100 and 10,000 times, stability is examined. A comparative analysis of the proposed Centroidous method obtained from the entropy, CRITIC, standard deviation, mean, and MEREC methods was performed. Three sets of data were generated for the comparative study of the methods, as follows: the mean value for alternatives with weak and strong differences and criteria with linear dependence. Additionally, an actual dataset from mobile phones was also used for the comparison.

Suggested Citation

  • Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič, 2024. "Centroidous Method for Determining Objective Weights," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-23, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:14:p:2269-:d:1439205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/14/2269/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/14/2269/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Valentinas Podvezko, 2016. "Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 267-283, March.
    2. Irina Vinogradova, 2019. "Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
    3. Morteza Yazdani & Pascale Zaraté & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems," Post-Print hal-02879091, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dariusz Kacprzak, 2024. "A new extension of the EDAS method in a fuzzy environment for group decision-making," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 51(3), pages 263-277, September.
    2. Vahideh Eslami & Parisa-Sadat Ashofteh & Parvin Golfam & Hugo A. Loáiciga, 2021. "Multi-criteria Decision-making Approach for Environmental Impact Assessment to Reduce the Adverse Effects Of Dams," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(12), pages 4085-4110, September.
    3. Alptekin Ulutaş & Darjan Karabasevic & Gabrijela Popovic & Dragisa Stanujkic & Phong Thanh Nguyen & Çağatay Karaköy, 2020. "Development of a Novel Integrated CCSD-ITARA-MARCOS Decision-Making Approach for Stackers Selection in a Logistics System," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Ignacio González García & Alfonso Mateos Caballero, 2021. "A Multi-Objective Bayesian Approach with Dynamic Optimization (MOBADO). A Hybrid of Decision Theory and Machine Learning Applied to Customs Fraud Control in Spain," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(13), pages 1-23, June.
    5. Su, Dan & Zhang, Lijun & Peng, Hua & Saeidi, Parvaneh & Tirkolaee, Erfan Babaee, 2023. "Technical challenges of blockchain technology for sustainable manufacturing paradigm in Industry 4.0 era using a fuzzy decision support system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    7. Ni, Lei & Chen, Yu-wang & de Brujin, Oscar, 2021. "Towards understanding socially influenced vaccination decision making: An integrated model of multiple criteria belief modelling and social network analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(1), pages 276-289.
    8. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Jalaladdin & Amiri, Maghsoud, 2023. "Evaluating the risks of the internet of things in renewable energy systems using a hybrid fuzzy decision approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    9. Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič, 2021. "Application of Bayesian Approach to Reduce the Uncertainty in Expert Judgments by Using a Posteriori Mean Function," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Audrius Čereška & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ina Tetsman & Irina Grinbergienė, 2016. "Sustainable Assessment of Aerosol Pollution Decrease Applying Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-12, June.
    11. Hosseini Dehshiri, Seyyed Jalaladdin & Amiri, Maghsoud & Hosseini Bamakan, Seyed Mojtaba, 2024. "Evaluating the blockchain technology strategies for reducing renewable energy development risks using a novel integrated decision framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    12. Pratibha Rani & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Abbas Mardani & Fausto Cavallaro & Dalia Štreimikienė & Syed Abdul Rehman Khan, 2020. "Pythagorean Fuzzy SWARA–VIKOR Framework for Performance Evaluation of Solar Panel Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.
    13. Askoldas Podviezko & Lyudmila Parfenova & Andrey Pugachev, 2019. "Tax Competitiveness of the New EU Member States," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, February.
    14. Marcio Pereira Basilio & Valdecy Pereira & Fatih Yigit, 2023. "New Hybrid EC-Promethee Method with Multiple Iterations of Random Weight Ranges: Applied to the Choice of Policing Strategies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-34, October.
    15. Huibing Cheng & Shanshui Zheng & Jianghong Feng, 2022. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Ferry Operator Selection: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Rađenović Žarko & Veselinović Ivana, 2017. "Integrated AHP-TOPSIS Method for the Assessment of Health Management Information Systems Efficiency," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 55(1), pages 121-142, March.
    17. Nitasha Hasteer & Rahul Sindhwani & Abhishek Behl & Akul Varshney & Adityansh Sharma, 2024. "Exploring the inhibitors for competitive AI software development through cloud driven transformation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 342(1), pages 355-397, November.
    18. Ulutaş Alptekin & Karaköy Çağatay, 2019. "An analysis of the logistics performance index of EU countries with an integrated MCDM model," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 5(4), pages 49-69, December.
    19. Zhi Wen & Huchang Liao & Ruxue Ren & Chunguang Bai & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Abdullah Al-Barakati, 2019. "Cold Chain Logistics Management of Medicine with an Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.
    20. Mehmet Ozcalici, 2023. "Integrating queue theory and multi-criteria decision-making tools for selecting roll-over car washing machine," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(2), pages 99-119.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:14:p:2269-:d:1439205. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.