IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijitdm/v15y2016i02ns0219622016500036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM

Author

Listed:
  • Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas

    (Research Institute of Smart Building Technologies, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Valentinas Podvezko

    (#x2020;Department of Mathematical Statistics, Vilnius Gedminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

In multiple criteria evaluation, criteria weights are of great importance. In practice, subjective criteria weights determined by specialists/experts are commonly used. The types of elements of a decision matrix also play an important role in the evaluation of alternatives. The objective weights help to estimate the structure of data. The entropy method is widely used for determining the weights (significances) of criteria. A new method of the criterion impact loss, CILOS, is used for determining a relative impact loss experienced by the criterion of an alternative, when another criterion is chosen to be the best. The authors of the paper have combined the best features of the entropy method and the CILOS approach to obtain a new method – Integrated Determination of Objective CRIteria Weights, or (IDOCRIW).

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijitdm:v:15:y:2016:i:02:n:s0219622016500036
    DOI: 10.1142/S0219622016500036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219622016500036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S0219622016500036?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Gang Kou & Yanqun Lu & Yi Peng & Yong Shi, 2012. "Evaluation Of Classification Algorithms Using Mcdm And Rank Correlation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 197-225.
    3. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Estimating the weights for multiple attributes in a composite criterion using pairwise judgments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(4), pages 473-493, December.
    4. Kou, Gang & Lin, Changsheng, 2014. "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 225-232.
    5. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    6. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Povilas Vainiūnas & Zenonas Turskis & Jolanta Tamošaitienė, 2012. "Multiple Criteria Decision Support System For Assessment Of Projects Managers In Construction," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(02), pages 501-520.
    7. Peng, Yi & Kou, Gang & Wang, Guoxun & Shi, Yong, 2011. "FAMCDM: A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 677-689, December.
    8. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    9. Dov Pekelman & Subrata K. Sen, 1974. "Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(8), pages 1217-1229, April.
    10. Huaizhi Su & Peng Qin & Zhihai Qin, 2013. "A Method for Evaluating Sea Dike Safety," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(15), pages 5157-5170, December.
    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. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    2. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Peide Liu & Peng Wang, 2017. "Some Improved Linguistic Intuitionistic Fuzzy Aggregation Operators and Their Applications to Multiple-Attribute Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 817-850, May.
    5. Shouzhen Zeng & Jianping Chen & Xingsen Li, 2016. "A Hybrid Method for Pythagorean Fuzzy Multiple-Criteria Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 403-422, March.
    6. Milan Ranđelović & Jelena Stanković & Kristijan Kuk & Gordana Savić & Dragan Ranđelović, 2018. "An Approach to Determining the Importance of Model Criteria in Certifying a City as Business-Friendly," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 156-165, April.
    7. Zenonas Turskis & Nikolaj Goranin & Assel Nurusheva & Seilkhan Boranbayev, 2019. "A Fuzzy WASPAS-Based Approach to Determine Critical Information Infrastructures of EU Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-25, January.
    8. Hesham K. Alfares & Salih O. Duffuaa, 2016. "Simulation-Based Evaluation of Criteria Rank-Weighting Methods in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 43-61, January.
    9. Peide Liu & Lili Zhang & Xi Liu & Peng Wang, 2016. "Multi-Valued Neutrosophic Number Bonferroni Mean Operators with their Applications in Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 1181-1210, September.
    10. Kou, Gang & Lin, Changsheng, 2014. "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 225-232.
    11. Fei Teng & Peide Liu & Li Zhang & Juan Zhao, 2019. "Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods with Unbalanced Linguistic Variables Based on Maclaurin Symmetric Mean Operators," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 105-146, January.
    12. Zhang, Huanhuan & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi, 2019. "Soft consensus cost models for group decision making and economic interpretations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 964-980.
    13. Ayfer Basar & Özgür Kabak & Y. Ilker Topcu, 2017. "A Decision Support Methodology for Locating Bank Branches: A Case Study in Turkey," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(01), pages 59-86, January.
    14. Changsheng Lin & Gang Kou & Yi Peng & Fawaz E. Alsaadi, 2022. "Aggregation of the nearest consistency matrices with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 179-195, September.
    15. O. H. Salman & A. A. Zaidan & B. B. Zaidan & Naserkalid & M. Hashim, 2017. "Novel Methodology for Triage and Prioritizing Using “Big Data” Patients with Chronic Heart Diseases Through Telemedicine Environmental," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1211-1245, September.
    16. Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2009. "Building a set of additive value functions representing a reference preorder and intensities of preference: GRIP method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 460-486, June.
    17. Ziho Kang & Thomas Morin, 2016. "Multi-Attribute Decision Making in a Bidding Game with Imperfect Information and Uncertainty," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 63-81, January.
    18. Liu, Fang & Zou, Shu-Cai & Li, Qing, 2020. "Deriving priorities from pairwise comparison matrices with a novel consistency index," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 374(C).
    19. Marjan S. Jalali & Fernando A. F. Ferreira & João J. M. Ferreira & Ieva Meidutė-Kavaliauskienė, 2016. "Integrating Metacognitive and Psychometric Decision-Making Approaches for Bank Customer Loyalty Measurement," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 815-837, July.
    20. Aleksandras Krylovas & Stanislavas Dadelo & Natalja Kosareva & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2017. "Entropy–KEMIRA Approach for MCDM Problem Solution in Human Resources Selection Task," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1183-1209, September.

    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:wsi:ijitdm:v:15:y:2016:i:02:n:s0219622016500036. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijitdm/ijitdm.shtml .

    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.