2013 | 8 | 178-196
Article title

Robust Ordinal Regression Applied to TOPSIS

Title variants
Languages of publication
This paper proposes a new method for ranking a nite set of alternatives evaluated on multiple criteria. The presented method combines the robust ordinal regression (ROR) approach and the ranking score based on the aggregate distance measure function coming from the TOPSIS method. In our method, the preference model is a set of ad- ditive value functions compatible with a non-complete set of pairwise comparisons of some reference alternatives given by the decision maker (DM). Based on this set of compatible value functions, we dene an ag- gregate function representing relative closeness to the reference point (ideal solution) in the value space. The ranking score determined by this distance measure is then used to rank all alternatives. Calculating the distance in the value space permits to avoid normalization used in TOPSIS to transform original evaluations on different criteria scales into a common scale. This normalization is perceived as a weakness of TOPSIS and other methods based on a distance measure, because the ranking of alternatives depends on the normalization technique and the distance measure. Thus, ROR applied to TOPSIS does not only facilitate the preference elicitation but also solves the problem of non-meaningfulness of TOPSIS. Finally, an instructive example is given to illustrate the proposed method.
Physical description
  • Abo-Sinna M. A., Amer A.H. (2005), Extensions of TOPSIS for Multiobjective Large-scale NonlinearProgramming Problems, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 162, p. 243-256.
  • Braglia M., Frosolini M., Montanari R. (2003), Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach for Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 19, p. 425-443.
  • Chen C.T. (2000). Extension of the TOPSIS for Group Decision-making under Fuzzy Environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, p.
  • Chen M.F. Tzeng G.H. (2004). Combining Grey Relation and TOPSIS Concepts for Selecting an Expatriate Host Country, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40. p. 1473-1490.
  • Chen S., Hwang C. (1992). Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag.
  • Chu T. C. (2002). Facility Location Selection Using Fuzzy TOPSIS under Group Decisions, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems. 10. p. 687.
  • Deng H., Yeh C.H., Willis R.J. (2000), Inter-company Comparison Using Modified TOPSIS with Objective Weights, Computers and Operations Research, 27. p. 963-973.
  • Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. (2005), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. Springer. New York.
  • Figueira J., Greco S., Słowiński R. (2009). Building a Set of Additive Value Functions Representing a Reference Preorder and Intensities of Preference: GRIP Method, European Journal of Operational Research, 195(2), p. 460-486.
  • Greco S., Kadziński M., Słowiński R. (2011), Selection of a Representative Value Function in Robust Multiple Criteria Sorting. Computers & Operations Research. 38, p. 1620 1637.
  • Greco S., Matarazzo B., Słowiński R. (2001), Rough Sets Theory for Multicriteria Decision Analysis, European Journal of Operational Research, 129, p. 147.
  • Greco S., Mousseau V., Słowiński R. (2008). Ordinal Regression Revisited: Multiple Criteria Ranking with a Set of Additive Value Functions, European Journal of Operational Research, 191, p. 415-435.
  • Greco S., Słowiński R., Figueira J., Mousseau V. (2010), Robust Ordinal Regression, in: New Advances in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, eds. M. Ehrgott. et al., Springer, p. 273-320.
  • Hwang C., Yoon K. (1981), Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
  • Jacquet-Lagreze E., Siskos Y. (1982). Assessing a Set of Additive Utility Functions for Multicriteria Decision-making, the UTA Method, European Journal of Operational Research. 10. p. 151-164.
  • Kadziński M., Greco S., Słowiński R. (2012), Selection of a Representative Value Function in Robust Multiple Criteria Ranking and Choice, European Journal of Operational Research, 217(3), p. 541-553.
  • Kiss L., Martel J., Nadeau R. (1994), ELECCALC - an Interactive Software for Modelling the Decision Maker's Preferences, Decision Support Systems, 12. p. 757-777.
  • Lai Y.J., Liu T.Y., Hwang C.L. (1994), TOPSIS for MODM, European Journal of Operational Research, 76, p. 486-500.
  • Liao H.C. (2003), Using PCR-TOPSIS to Optimize Taguchis Multi-response Problem, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 22, p. 649-655.
  • March J. (1978), Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity and the Engineering of Choice, Bell Journal of Economics, 9, p. 587-608.
  • Martel J., Roy B. (2006). Analyse de la signifiance de diverses procédures d'agrégation multicritere, INFOR. 44, p. 191-214.
  • Mousseau V., Słowiński R. (1998), Inferring an ELECTRE TRI Model from Assignment Examples, Journal of Global Optimization, 12. p. 157-174.
  • Mousseau V., Słowiński R., Zielniewicz P. (2000), A User-oriented Implementation of the ELECTRE-TRI Method Integrating Preference Elicitation Support, Computers & Operations Research, 27. p. 757-777.
  • Olson D.L. (2004), Comparison of Weights in TOPSIS Models, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40, p. 721-727.
  • Opricovic S., Tzeng G.H. (2004), Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, 156, p. 445-455.
  • Pekelman D., Sen S. (1974), Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights, Management Science, 20, p. 1217- 1229.
  • Roy B., Bouyssou D. (1993), Aide Multicritere à la Décision: Méthodes et Cas, Economica.
  • Srinivasan V., Shocker A. (1973), Estimating the Weights for Multiple Attributes in a Composite Criterion Using Pairwise Judgments. Psychometrika, 38, p. 473-493.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.