A new similarity measure for rankings obtained in MCDM problems using different normalization techniques

• Authors: KACPRZAK Dariusz
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper presents an analysis of the impact of normalization techniques on the ranking of alternatives obtained using the combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method. Similarity measures known from the literature and a new measure called the TOPSIS similarity measure (TOPSIS-SM) are used to assess the resulting rankings. This new measure is based on the TOPSIS algorithm, where the arithmetic mean of the considered rankings is taken as the ideal solution. In contrast, the antiideal solution is divided into a minimum and a maximum solution, which exhibit maximum separation from the ideal solution. The results obtained by this new method are different from those obtained using other similarity measures known from the literature.

Keywords

EN

CoCoSo method; normalization techniques; similarity measures; a new TOPSIS similarity measure

• Publisher: Politechnika Wrocławska. Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej
• Journal: Operations Research and Decisions
• Year: 2024
• Volume: 34
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 47-65

Contributors

author

KACPRZAK Dariusz

• Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Computer Science, Bialystok University of Technology, Bialystok, Poland

References

• Abdullah, L., and Adawiyah, C. W. R. Simple additive weighting methods of multi criteria decision making and applications: A decade review. International Journal of Information Processing and Management 5, 1 (2014), 39–49.
• Behzadian, M., Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M., and Ignatius, J. A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications 39, 17 (2012), 13051–13069.
• Çelen, A. Comparative analysis of normalization procedures in Topsis method: With an application to Turkish deposit banking market. Informatica 25, 2 (2014), 185–208.
• Chakraborty, S., and Yeh, C.-H. A simulation comparison of normalization procedures for Topsis. In 2009 International Conference on Computers & Industrial Engineering (Troyes, France, 2009), IEEE, pp. 1815–1820.
• Chakraborty, S., and Yeh, C.-H. Rank similarity based MADM method selection. In 2012 International Conference on Statistics in Science, Business and Engineering (ICSSBE) (Langkawi, Malaysia, 2012), pp. 1–6.
• Chatterjee, P., and Chakraborty, S. Flexible manufacturing system selection using preference ranking methods: A comparative study. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations 5, 2 (2014), 315–338.
• Churchman, C. W., and Ackoff, R. L. An approximate measure of value. Journal of the Operations Research Society of America 2, 2 (1954), 172–187.
• Ghasempour, R., Nazari, M. A., Ebrahimi, M., Ahmadi, M. H., and Hadiyanto, H. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approach for selecting solar plants site and technology: A review. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development 8, 1 (2019).
• Halicka, K., and Kacprzak, D. Linear ordering of selected gerontechnologies using selected MCGDM methods. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 27, 4 (2021), 921–947.
• Hwang, C.-L., and Yoon, K. Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Methods and Applications. A State-of-the-Art Survey. Springer, Berlin, 1981.
• Jahan, A., and Edwards, K. L. A state-of-the-art survey on the influence of normalization techniques in ranking: Improving the materials selection process in engineering design. Materials & Design (1980-2015) 65 (2015), 335–342.
• Jarocka, M. Choice of standardisation formula in the comparative analysis of multivariate objects. Ekonomia i Zarza˛dzanie 7, 1 (2015), 113–126, (in Polish).
• Kendall, M. G. A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrika 30, 1/2 (1938), 81–93.
• Koganti, V. K., Menikonda, N., Anbuudayasankar, S. P., Krishnaraj, T., Athhukuri, R. K., and Vastav, M. S. Grahp top model for supplier selection in supply chain: A hybrid MCDM approach. Decision Science Letters 8, 1 (2019), 65–80
• Kukuła, K. Zero-based unitarisation method against the background of selected methods for the normalisation of diagnostic characteristics. Acta Scientifica Academiae Ostroviensis 4 (1999), 5–31 (in Polish).
• Kukuła, K. Zero-based unitarisation method. Wydanictwo Naukowe PWN, 2000 (in Polish).
• Nijkamp, P., and van Delft, A. Multi-Criteria Analysis and Regional Decision-Making. Vol. 8. Springer Science & Business Media, 1977.
• Palczewski, K., and Sałabun, W. The fuzzy topsis applications in the last decade. Procedia Computer Science 159 (2019), 2294–2303.
• Rudnik, K., and Kacprzak, D. Fuzzy Topsis method with ordered fuzzy numbers for flow control in a manufacturing system. Applied Soft Computing 52 (2017), 1020–1041.
• Saaty, T. L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York,1980.
• Stojčić, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., and Mardani, A. Application of MCDM methods in sustainability engineering: A literature review 2008–2018. Symmetry 11, 3 (2019), 350.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., and Camarinha-Matos, L. M. Normalization techniques for multi-criteria decision making: analytical hierarchy process case study. In Technological Innovation for Cyber-Physical Systems: 7th IFIP WG 5.5/SOCOLNET Advanced Doctoral Conference on Computing, Electrical and Industrial Systems, DoCEIS 2016, Costa de Caparica, Portugal, April 11–13, 2016, Proceedings (Cham 2016), L. M. Camarinha-Matos, A. J. Falcão, N. Vafaei and S. Najdi, Eds., Springer, pp. 261–269.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., and Camarinha-Matos, L. M. Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method. International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences 10, 1 (2018), 19–38.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., and Camarinha-Matos, L. M. Selecting normalization techniques for the analytical hierarchy process. In Technological Innovation for Life Improvement: 11th IFIP WG 5.5/SOCOLNET Advanced Doctoral Conference on Computing, Electrical and Industrial Systems, DoCEIS 2020, Costa de Caparica, Portugal, July 1–3, 2020, Proceedings (Cham, 2020), L. M. Camarinha-Matos, N. Farhadi, F. Lopes, H. Pereira , Eds., Springer, pp. 43–52.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., and Camarinha-Matos, L. M. Assessing normalization techniques for simple additive weighting method. Procedia Computer Science 199 (2022), 1229–1236.
• Walesiak, M. Data Normalization in Multivariate Data Analysis. An Overview and Properties Przegla˛d Statystyczny 61, 4 (2014), 363–372, (in Polish).
• Walesiak, M. The choice of normalization method and rankings of the set of objects based on composite indicator values. Statistics in Transition. New Series 19, 4 (2018), 693–710.
• Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., and Turskis, Z. A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision 57, 9 (2019), 2501–2519.
• Yue, Z. An extended TOPSIS for determining weights of decision makers with interval numbers. Knowledge-Based Systems 24, 1 (2011), 146–153.
• Żabicki, P., and Gardziejczyk, W. Issues of criteria normalization in the multicriteria analyzes in the design of roads. Budownictwo i Architektura 13, 4 (2014), 325–333 (in Polish).
• Zavadskas, E. K., and Turskis, Z. A new logarithmic normalization method in games theory. Informatica 19, 2 (2008), 303–314.
• Zeliaś, A. Some notes on the selection of normalization of diagnostic variables. Statistics in Transitions 5, 5 (2002), 787–802.
• Zhang, X., Lu, J., and Peng, Y. Hybrid MCDM model for location of logistics hub: A case in China under the belt and road initiative. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 41227–41245.

Identifiers

DOI

10.37190/ord240204