IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v34y2024i3p243-266id13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Generalization of stable preference ordering towards ideal solution approach for working with imprecise data

Author

Listed:
  • Andrii Shekhovtsov
  • Jean Dezert
  • Wojciech Sałabun

Abstract

When solving real-world decision-making problems, it is important to deal with imprecise quantitative values modeled by numerical intervals. Although a different extension of the multi-criteria decision-making methods could deal with intervals, many of them are complex and lack such properties as robustness to rank reversal. We present an extension of the stable preference ordering towards ideal solution (SPOTIS) rank reversal free method to deal with imprecise data. This extension of SPOTIS is also rank reversal-free. It offers a new efficient approach for solving multi-criteria decision-analysis problems under imprecision and can use different metrics of distance between intervals. The proposed approach is compared to the popular Interval technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution) extension and performs very similarly to it. We also show on a practical example that the interval TOPSIS approach is not robust to rank reversal, contrary to our new SPOTIS extension approach, which offers a stable decision-making behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrii Shekhovtsov & Jean Dezert & Wojciech Sałabun, 2024. "Generalization of stable preference ordering towards ideal solution approach for working with imprecise data," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 34(3), pages 243-266.
  • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:34:y:2024:i:3:p:243-266:id:13
    DOI: 10.37190/ord2403013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ord.pwr.edu.pl/assets/papers_archive/ord2024vol34no3_13.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.37190/ord2403013?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    2. Dembczynski, Krzysztof & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2009. "Rough set approach to multiple criteria classification with imprecise evaluations and assignments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 626-636, October.
    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. Al-Ebbini, Lina & Oztekin, Asil & Chen, Yao, 2016. "FLAS: Fuzzy lung allocation system for US-based transplantations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 1051-1065.
    2. José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2021. "An Alternative Aggregation Process for Composite Indexes: An Application to the Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 443-467, January.
    3. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-41, August.
    4. Cinzia Colapinto & Raja Jayaraman & Fouad Ben Abdelaziz & Davide La Torre, 2020. "Environmental sustainability and multifaceted development: multi-criteria decision models with applications," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 405-432, October.
    5. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    6. Abbas Mardani & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Madjid Tavana & Romualdas Bausys & Othman Ibrahim, 2017. "Recent Fuzzy Generalisations of Rough Sets Theory: A Systematic Review and Methodological Critique of the Literature," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-33, October.
    7. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Towards Sustainable Entrepreneurship Holistic Construct," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-33, November.
    8. Giovanni Ávila-Flores & Judith Juárez-Mancilla & Gustavo Hinojosa-Arango & Plácido Cruz-Chávez & Juan Manuel López-Vivas & Oscar Arizpe-Covarrubias, 2020. "A Practical Index to Estimate Mangrove Conservation Status: The Forests from La Paz Bay, Mexico as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    10. Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Roman Słowiński, 2017. "Handling imprecise evaluations in multiple criteria decision aiding and robust ordinal regression by n-point intervals," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 127-157, June.
    11. Du, Wen Sheng & Hu, Bao Qing, 2018. "A fast heuristic attribute reduction approach to ordered decision systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 440-452.
    12. Yi-Shian Lee & Lee-Ing Tong, 2012. "Predicting High or Low Transfer Efficiency of Photovoltaic Systems Using a Novel Hybrid Methodology Combining Rough Set Theory, Data Envelopment Analysis and Genetic Programming," Energies, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Aleksandra Bączkiewicz & Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Andrii Shekhovtsov & Mykhailo Yelmikheiev & Volodymyr Kozlov & Wojciech Sałabun, 2021. "Comparative Analysis of Solar Panels with Determination of Local Significance Levels of Criteria Using the MCDM Methods Resistant to the Rank Reversal Phenomenon," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-21, September.
    14. Zhen Zhang & Zhuolin Li, 2023. "Consensus-based TOPSIS-Sort-B for multi-criteria sorting in the context of group decision-making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 911-938, June.
    15. Almeida-Dias, J. & Figueira, J.R. & Roy, B., 2012. "A multiple criteria sorting method where each category is characterized by several reference actions: The Electre Tri-nC method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(3), pages 567-579.
    16. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    17. I. Argyriou & N. Sifakis & T. Tsoutsos, 2022. "Ranking measures to improve the sustainability of Mediterranean ports based on multicriteria decision analysis: a case study of Souda port, Chania, Crete," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6449-6466, May.
    18. V. Liern & B. Pérez-Gladish, 2022. "Multiple criteria ranking method based on functional proximity index: un-weighted TOPSIS," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1099-1121, April.
    19. Eduardo Fernandez & Jorge Navarro & Rafael Olmedo, 2018. "Characterization of the Effectiveness of Several Outranking-Based Multi-Criteria Sorting Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(04), pages 1047-1084, July.
    20. Prasad, Sanjeev K. & Mangaraj, B.K., 2022. "A multi-objective competitive-design framework for fuel procurement planning in coal-fired power plants for sustainable operations," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).

    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:wut:journl:v:34:y:2024:i:3:p:243-266:id:13. 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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iopwrpl.html .

    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.