Weight determination and ranking priority in interval group MCDM

Document Type : Article

Authors

Department of Mathematics, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

In this study, we propose a method to determine the weight of decision makers (DMs) in group multiple criteria decision making (GMCDM) problems with interval data .Here, we obtain an interval weight for each DM and the relative closeness of each decision from the negative ideal solution (NIS) and the positive ideal solution (PIS) is then computed. In the proposed method, after weighting the decision matrix of each DM, the alternatives are ranked using interval arithmetic. A comparative example together with a real world problem on air quality assessment is given to illustrate our method. Our findings show that the proposed approach is a suitable tool to solve GMCDM problems.

Keywords

Main Subjects


References
1. Ishizaka, A. and Nemery P., Multi-Criteria Decision
Analysis: Methods and Software, John Wiley and Sons
(2013).
2. Keeney, R. and Rai a, H., Decisions With Multiple
Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeo s, New
York: Wiley (1976).
3. Koksalan, M., Wallenius, J., and Zoints, S., Multiple
Criteria Decision Making: From Early History to the
21st Century, World Scienti c Publishing, New Jersey
(2011).
4. Jacquet-Lagreze, E. and Siskos, J. Assessing a set of
additive utility functions for multiple criteria decision
making", European Journal of Operational Research,
10, pp. 151{164 (1982).
5. Solymosi, T. and Dombi, J. A method for determining
the weights of criteria: the centralized weights", European
Journal of Operational Research, 26, pp. 35{41
(1986).
6. Guitouni, A. and Martel, J.M. Tentative guidelines
to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method",
European Journal of Operational Research, 109, pp.
501{521 (1998).
7. Figueira, J., Salvatore, G., and Ehrgott, M., Eds,
Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art
Surveys, New York: Springer Science & Business
Media (2005).
8. Wallenius, J., Dyer, J.S., Fishburn, P.C., Steuer,
R.E., Zionts, S., and Deb, K. Multiple criteria decision
making, multiattribute utility theory: recent
accomplishments and what lies ahead", Management
Science, 54, pp. 1336{1349 (2008).
9. Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K., Multiple Attributes Decision
Making Methods and Applications, Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer (1981).
10. Opricovic, S. and Tzeng, G.-H. Compromise solution
by MCDM methods", European Journal of Operational
Research, 156(2), pp. 445{455 (2004).
11. Saaty, T.L., A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical
structures", Journal of Mathematical Psychology,
15, pp. 234{281 (1977).
12. Edwards, W. How to use multi attribute utility
measurement for social decision making", IEEE Transactions
on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 7, pp. 326{
340 (1977).
13. Banae Costa, C. and Vansnick, J.-C. MACBETH
- An interactive path towards the construction of
cardinal value functions", International Transactions
in Operational Research, 1, pp. 489{500 (1994).
14. Govindan, K. and Jespen, MB. ELECTRE: A comprehensive
literature review on methodologies and applications",
European Journal of Operational Research,
250, pp. 1{29 (2016).
15. Ishizaka, A. and Siraj, S. Are multi-criteria decisionmaking
tools useful? An experimental comparative
study of three methods", European Journal of Operational
Research, 264(2), pp. 462{471 (2017).
16. Nassereddine, M. and Eskandari, H. An integrated
MCDM approach to evaluate public transportation
systems in Tehran", Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice, 106, pp. 427{439 (2017).
17. Abdollahi, A., Pour-Moallem, N., and Abdollahi, A.
Dynamic negawatt demand response resource modeling
and prioritizing in power markets", Scientia
Iranica, 27(3), pp. 1361{1372 (2020).
S. Sa arzadeh et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions E: Industrial Engineering 27 (2020) 3242{3252 3251
18. Gou, X., Xu, Z., and Liao, H. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic
entropy and cross-entropy measures and alternative
queuing method for multiple criteria decision making",
Information Sciences, 388, pp. 225{246 (2017).
19. Ren, Z., Xu, Z., and Wang, H. Dual hesitant
fuzzy VIKOR method for multi-criteria group decision
making based on fuzzy measure and new comparison
method", Information Sciences, 388, pp. 1{16 (2017).
20. Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Turskis, Z., and
Adeli, H. Hybrid multiple-criteria decision-making
methods: A review of applications in engineering",
Scientia Iranica., Transactions A, Civil Engineering,
23(1), p. 1 (2016).
21. Chen, L. and Xu, Z. A new prioritized multi-criteria
outranking method: The prioritized PROMETHEE",
Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 29(5), pp.
2099{2110 (2015).
22. Yu, X., Xu, Z., and Ma, Y. Prioritized multi-criteria
decision making based on the idea of PROMETHEE",
Procedia Computer Science, 17, pp. 449{456 (2013).
23. Keeney, R.L. and Kirkwood, C.W. Group decision
making using cardinal social welfare functions", Management
Science, 22, pp. 430{437 (1975).
24. Keeney, R.L. A group preference axiomatization with
cardinal utility", Management Science, 23, pp. 140{
145 (1976).
25. Brock, H.W. The problem of 'utility weights' in group
preference aggregation", Operations Research, 28, pp.
176{187 (1980).
26. Ramanathan, R. and Ganesh, L.S. Group preference
aggregation methods employed in AHP: an evaluation
and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages",
European Journal of Operational Research, 79,
pp. 249{265 (1994).
27. Van den Honert, R.C. Decisional power in group decision
making: a note on the allocation of group members
weights in the multiplicative AHP and SMART",
Group Decision and Negotiation, 10, pp. 275{286
(2001).
28. Xu, Z.S. Group decision making based on multiple
types of linguistic preference relations", Information
Sciences, 178, pp. 452{467 (2008).
29. Abootalebi, S., Hadi-Vencheh, A., and Jamshidi, A.
An Improvement to determining expert weights in
group multiple attribute decision making problem",
Group Decision and Negotiation, 27(2), pp. 215{221
(2018).
30. Wang, H.-F., Multicriteria Decision Analysis - From
Certainty to Uncertainty, Ting Lung Book Co, Taipei
(2004).
31. Mahmoudi, A., Sadi-Nezhad, S., and Makui, A.
An extended fuzzy VIKOR for group decisionmaking
based on fuzzy distance to supplier selection",
Scientia Iranica., Transactions E, Industrial Engineering,
23(4), p. 1879 (2016).
32. Hu, J., Chen, P., and Chen, X. Intuitionistic random
multi-criteria decision-making approach based on
prospect theory with multiple reference intervals", Scientia
Iranica., Transactions E, Industrial Engineering,
21(6), p. 2347 (2014).
33. Minatour, Y., Khazaie, J., Ataei, M., and Javadi,
A.A. An integrated decision support system for dam
site selection", Scientia Iranica., Transactions A, Civil
Engineering, 22(2), p. 319 (2015).
34. Yu, X., Zhang, S., Liao, X., and Qi, X. ELECTRE
methods in prioritized MCDM environment", Information
Sciences, 424, pp. 301{316 (2018).
35. Yue, Z. An extended TOPSIS for determining weights
of decision makers with interval numbers", Knowledge-
Based Systems, 24, pp. 146{153 (2011).
36. Jahanshahloo, G.R., Hosseinzadeh Lot , F., and
Izadikhah, M. An algorithmic method to extend
TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval
data", Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175,
pp. 1375{1384 (2006).
37. Sayadi, M.K., Heydari, M., and Shahanaghi, K.
Extension of VIKOR method for decision making
problem with interval numbers", Applied Mathematical
Modelling, 33, pp. 2257{2262 (2009).
38. Rezaei, J. and Salimi, N. Optimal ABC inventory
classi cation using interval Programming", International
Journal of Systems Science, 46(11), pp. 1944{
1952 (2015).
39. Dymova, L., Sevastjanov, P., and Tikhonenko, A. A
direct interval extension of TOPSIS method", Expert
Systems with Applications, 40, pp. 4841{4847 (2013).
40. Hafezalkotob, A., Hafezalkotob, A., and Sayadi, M.K.
Extension of MULTIMOORA method with interval
numbers: An application in materials selection",
Applied Mathematical Modelling, 40, pp. 1372{1386
(2016).
41. Liu, W. and Li, L. An approach to determining the
integrated weights of decision makers based on interval
number group decision matrices", Knowledge-Based
Systems, 90, pp. 92{98 (2015).
42. Pamucar, D., Stevic, Z., and Zavadskas, E.K. Integration
of interval rough AHP and interval rough MABAC
methods for evaluating university web pages", Applied
Soft Computing, 67, pp. 141{163 (2018).
43. Feng, Y., Hong, Z., Tian, G., Li, Z., Tan, J., and Hu,
H. Environmentally friendly MCDM of reliabilitybased
product optimisation combining DEMATELbased
ANP, interval uncertainty and Vlse Kriterijumska
Optimizacija Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR)",
Information Sciences, 442, pp. 128{144 (2018).
44. Wanke, P., Kalam Azad, M.A., Barros, C.P., and
Hadi-Vencheh, A. Predicting performance in ASEAN
banks: an integrated fuzzy MCDM-neural network
approach", Expert Systems, 33(3), pp. 213{229 (2016).
3252 S. Sa arzadeh et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions E: Industrial Engineering 27 (2020) 3242{3252
45. Hajek, P. and Froelich, W. Integrating TOPSIS with
interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy cognitive maps for
e ective group decision making", Information Sciences,
485, pp. 394{412 (2019).
46. Frini, A. and Amor, S.B. MUPOM: A multi-criteria
multi-period outranking method for decision-making
in sustainable development context", Environmental
Impact Assessment Review, 76, pp. 10{25 (2019).
47. Alefeld, G. and Herzberger, J., Introduction to Interval
Computations, New York: Academic Press (1983).
48. Xu, Z.S. On method for uncertain multiple attribute
decision making problems with uncertain multiplicative
preference information on alternatives", Fuzzy
Optimization and Decision Making, 4, pp. 131{139
(2005).
49. Xu, Z.S. Dependent uncertain ordered weighted aggregation
operators", Information Fusion, 9, pp. 310{
316 (2008).
50. Li, D.-F. Relative ratio method for multiple attribute
decision making problems", International Journal of
Information Technology & Decision Making, 8(2) pp.
289{311 (2009).