IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v7y2019i10p915-d272913.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Irina Vinogradova

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

Abstract

Optimization problems are relevant to various areas of human activity. In different cases, the problems are solved by applying appropriate optimization methods. A range of optimization problems has resulted in a number of different methods and algorithms for reaching solutions. One of the problems deals with the decision-making area, which is an optimal option selected from several options of comparison. Multi-Attribute Decision-Making (MADM) methods are widely applied for making the optimal solution, selecting a single option or ranking choices from the most to the least appropriate. This paper is aimed at providing MADM methods as a component of mathematics-based optimization. The theoretical part of the paper presents evaluation criteria of methods as the objective functions. To illustrate the idea, some of the most frequently used methods in practice—Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Complex Proportional Assessment Method (COPRAS), Multi-Objective Optimization by Ratio Analysis (MOORA) and Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE)—were chosen. These methods use a finite number of explicitly given alternatives. The research literature does not propose the best or most appropriate MADM method for dealing with a specific task. Thus, several techniques are frequently applied in parallel to make the right decision. Each method differs in the data processing, and therefore the results of MADM methods are obtained on different scales. The practical part of this paper demonstrates how to combine the results of several applied methods into a single value. This paper proposes a new approach for evaluating that involves merging the results of all applied MADM methods into a single value, taking into account the suitability of the methods for the task to be solved. Taken as a basis is the fact that if a method is more stable to a minor data change, the greater importance (weight) it has for the merged result. This paper proposes an algorithm for determining the stability of MADM methods by applying the statistical simulation method using a sequence of random numbers from the given distribution. This paper shows the different approaches to normalizing the results of MADM methods. For arranging negative values and making the scales of the results of the methods equal, Weitendorf’s linear normalization and classical and author-proposed transformation techniques have been illustrated in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Irina Vinogradova, 2019. "Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Methods as a Part of Mathematical Optimization," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(10), pages 1-21, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:7:y:2019:i:10:p:915-:d:272913
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/7/10/915/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/7/10/915/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aleksandras Krylovas & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Natalja Kosareva & Stanislav Dadelo, 2014. "New KEMIRA Method for Determining Criteria Priority and Weights in Solving MCDM Problem," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(06), pages 1119-1133.
    2. 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.
    3. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1984. "Prométhée: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9305, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Bernardo, John J & Blin, Jean-Marie, 1977. "A Programming Model of Consumer Choice among Multi-Attributed Brands," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 4(2), pages 111-118, Se.
    5. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2001. "Evaluating airline competitiveness using multiattribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 405-415, October.
    6. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans, 1992. "PROMETHEE V: MCDM problems with segmentation constraints," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9341, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Towards Strong Sustainability Management—A Generalized PROSA Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-29, March.
    8. Valentinas Podvezko, 2009. "Application of AHP technique," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 181-189, March.
    9. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & Deng, Hepu & Chang, Yu-Hern, 2000. "Fuzzy multicriteria analysis for performance evaluation of bus companies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 459-473, November.
    10. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2013. "Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process with ELECTRE and PROMETHEE," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 820-846.
    11. Simona Kildienė & Arturas Kaklauskas & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2011. "COPRAS based Comparative Analysis of the European Country Management Capabilities within the Construction Sector in the Time of Crisis," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 417-434, February.
    12. Peter C. Fishburn, 1967. "Methods of Estimating Additive Utilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(7), pages 435-453, March.
    13. Opricovic, Serafim & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung, 2004. "Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 445-455, July.
    14. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    16. Stuart Dreyfus, 2002. "Richard Bellman on the Birth of Dynamic Programming," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(1), pages 48-51, February.
    17. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    18. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1979. "Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 339-338, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič, 2023. "Comparative Sensitivity Analysis of Some Fuzzy AHP Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-41, December.
    3. Ramesh Allipour Birgani & Amirhossein Takian & Abolghasem Djazayery & Ali Kianirad & Hamed Pouraram, 2022. "Climate Change and Food Security Prioritizing Indices: Applying Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Social Network Analysis (SNA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Olubayo Babatunde & Michael Emezirinwune & John Adebisi & Khadeejah A. Abdulsalam & Busola Akintayo & Oludolapo Olanrewaju, 2024. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Approach for Selecting Sustainable Power Systems Simulation Software in Undergraduate Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-22, October.
    5. Daniel Fernández & Álvaro Rodríguez-Prieto & Ana M. Camacho, 2022. "Optimal Parameters Selection in Advanced Multi-Metallic Co-Extrusion Based on Independent MCDM Analytical Approaches and Numerical Simulation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(23), pages 1-26, November.
    6. Irina Vinogradova-Zinkevič, 2024. "Centroidous Method for Determining Objective Weights," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-23, July.
    7. Máximo Méndez & Mariano Frutos & Fabio Miguel & Ricardo Aguasca-Colomo, 2020. "TOPSIS Decision on Approximate Pareto Fronts by Using Evolutionary Algorithms: Application to an Engineering Design Problem," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, November.
    8. Cheng-An Tsai & Tien-Hwa Ho & Jyh-Shyan Lin & Chien-Chih Tu & Che-Wei Chang, 2021. "Model for Evaluating Outsourcing Logistics Companies in the COVID-19 Pandemic," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-15, September.
    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.

    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. Martina Kuncova & Jana Seknickova, 2022. "Two-stage weighted PROMETHEE II with results’ visualization," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 30(2), pages 547-571, June.
    2. Willem Brauers, 2013. "Multi-objective seaport planning by MOORA decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 39-58, July.
    3. Majid Baseer & Christian Ghiaus & Roxane Viala & Ninon Gauthier & Souleymane Daniel, 2023. "pELECTRE-Tri: Probabilistic ELECTRE-Tri Method—Application for the Energy Renovation of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-25, July.
    4. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
    5. Yang, Chih-Hao & Lee, Kuen-Chang, 2020. "Developing a strategy map for forensic accounting with fraud risk management: An integrated balanced scorecard-based decision model," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Goswami Shankha Shubhra, 2020. "Outranking Methods: Promethee I and Promethee II," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 93-110, January.
    7. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    8. Ioannis Sitaridis & Fotis Kitsios, 2020. "Competitiveness analysis and evaluation of entrepreneurial ecosystems: a multi-criteria approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 377-399, November.
    9. Manuel Casal-Guisande & Alberto Comesaña-Campos & Alejandro Pereira & José-Benito Bouza-Rodríguez & Jorge Cerqueiro-Pequeño, 2022. "A Decision-Making Methodology Based on Expert Systems Applied to Machining Tools Condition Monitoring," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, February.
    10. 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.
    11. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    12. Roman Vavrek, 2019. "Evaluation of the Impact of Selected Weighting Methods on the Results of the TOPSIS Technique," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1821-1843, November.
    13. Zohre Hoseinzade & Asal Zavarei & Kourosh Shirani, 2021. "Application of prediction–area plot in the assessment of MCDM methods through VIKOR, PROMETHEE II, and permutation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 109(3), pages 2489-2507, December.
    14. Abu-Taleb, Maher F. & Mareschal, Bertrand, 1995. "Water resources planning in the Middle East: Application of the PROMETHEE V multicriteria method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 500-511, March.
    15. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    16. Xiao-Kang Wang & Wen-Hui Hou & Chao Song & Min-Hui Deng & Yong-Yi Li & Jian-Qiang Wang, 2021. "BW-MaxEnt: A Novel MCDM Method for Limited Knowledge," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(14), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Priscila Celebrini de Oliveira Campos & Tainá da Silva Rocha Paz & Letícia Lenz & Yangzi Qiu & Camila Nascimento Alves & Ana Paula Roem Simoni & José Carlos Cesar Amorim & Gilson Brito Alves Lima & Ma, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision Method for Sustainable Watercourse Management in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-22, August.
    18. Marta Bottero & Chiara D’Alpaos & Alessandra Oppio, 2019. "Ranking of Adaptive Reuse Strategies for Abandoned Industrial Heritage in Vulnerable Contexts: A Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, February.
    19. Hassan, Mohammad Nurul & Hawas, Yaser E. & Ahmed, Kamran, 2013. "A multi-dimensional framework for evaluating the transit service performance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 47-61.
    20. Agata Sielska, 2010. "Multicriteria rankings of open-end investment funds and their stability," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 20(1), pages 111-129.

    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:7:y:2019:i:10:p:915-:d:272913. 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.