A mixed-integer linear programming model for aggregating multi–criteria decision making methods

  • Osman Pala Department of econometrics, Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University, Turkey
Keywords: Multiple Criteria Analysis; Aggregating MCDMs; Comparative Analysis; Maximin Strategy.

Abstract

Selecting an MCDM method to use in any decision-making problem is always a difficult issue regarding that there is no agreement generally on which method is the most appropriate one. This paper addressed a proposal of a hybrid approach for this problem. Under the assumption that there is no superiority among well-established and accepted MCDM methods, we defined a maximin strategy based on the fact that the lowest correlation between MCDMs and the proposed hybrid approach in terms of alternative rankings should be as high as possible. Even though MCDM methods often rank the alternatives differently, many methods perform similar ranking due to sharing alike mathematical operations. To avoid positive bias towards these methods in an integrated approach, we focused on a prioritizing scheme that supports different rankings. This prioritizing scheme also contributed to hinder the problem of selecting MCDMs with constraining the compound effect of similar rankings. We developed a hybrid decision-making model combining different MCDM methods with prioritizing them by using a binary integer linear programming model. We compared the proposed approach with some well-known prioritizing methods and the results revealed that the proposed approach produced better outcomes in obtaining the desired outputs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Barak, S., & Mokfi, T. (2019). Evaluation and selection of clustering methods using a hybrid group MCDM. Expert Systems with Applications, 138, 112817.

Baydaş, M., & Elma, O. E. (2021). An objectıve criteria proposal for the comparison of MCDM and weighting methods in financial performance measurement: An application in Borsa Istanbul. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 257-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402257b

Baydas, M., Elma, O. E., & Pamučar, D. (2022). Exploring the Specific Capacity of Different Multi Criteria Decision Making Approaches under Uncertainty using Data from Financial Markets. Expert Systems with Applications, 116755.

Biswas, S. (2020). Measuring performance of healthcare supply chains in India: A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 3(2), 162-189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame2003162b

Biswas, S., Bandyopadhyay, G., Guha, B., & Bhattacharjee, M. (2019). An ensemble approach for portfolio selection in a multi-criteria decision making framework. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 2(2), 138-158.

Bottomley, P. A., & Doyle, J. R. (2001). A comparison of three weight elicitation methods: good, better, and best. Omega, 29(6), 553-560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(01)00044-5

Brans, J.P., 1982. Lingenierie de la decision. Elaboration dinstruments daide a la decision. Methode PROMETHEE. In: Nadeau, R., Landry, M. (Eds.), Laide a la Decision: Nature, Instrument set Perspectives Davenir. Presses de UniversiteLaval, Q ebec, Canada, pp. 183–214.

Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(1), 5-24.

Brauers, W. K. M., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010). Project management by MULTIMOORA as an instrument for transition economies. Technological and economic development of economy, 16(1), 5-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.01

Das, M. C., Sarkar, B., & Ray, S. (2012). Decision making under conflicting environment: a new MCDM method. International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences, 5(2), 142-162. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJADS.2012.046505

Das, M. C., Sarkar, B., & Ray, S. (2015). A performance evaluation framework for technical institutions in one of the states of India. Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 773-790. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2013-0019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2013-0019

Deng, H., Yeh, C. H., & Willis, R. J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Research, 27(10), 963-973. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0548(99)00069-6

Depren, S. K., & Kalkan, S. B. (2018). Determination Of Countries’ Position Using Better Life Index: The Entropy Based Multimoora Approach. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(2), 353-366.

Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., & Papayannakis, L. (1995). Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method. Computers & Operations Research, 22(7), 763-770. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H

Doyle, J. R., Green, R. H., & Bottomley, P. A. (1997). Judging relative importance: direct rating and point allocation are not equivalent. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 70(1), 65-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1997.2694

Fishburn, P. C. (1967). Letter to the editor—additive utilities with incomplete product sets: application to priorities and assignments. Operations Research, 15(3), 537-542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.15.3.537

Gabus, A., & Fontela, E. (1972). World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL. Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland, 1-8.

Hwang, C.L.& Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. New York: Springer-Verlag. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9

Jahan, A., Mustapha, F., Sapuan, S. M., Ismail, M. Y., & Bahraminasab, M. (2012). A Framework For Weighting Of Criteria In Ranking Stage Of Material Selection Process, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 58(1), 411-420. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3366-7

Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Olfat, L., & Turskis, Z. (2015). Multi-criteria inventory classification using a new method of evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS). Informatica, 26(3), 435-451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2015.57

Kirkwood, C. W., & Corner, J. L. (1993). The effectiveness of partial information about attribute weights for ranking alternatives in multiattribute decision making. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 54(3), 456-476. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1993.1019

Kou, G., Lu, Y., Peng, Y., & Shi, Y. (2012). Evaluation of classification algorithms using MCDM and rank correlation. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 11(01), 197-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622012500095

Mohammadi, M., & Rezaei, J. (2020). Ensemble ranking: Aggregation of rankings produced by different multi-criteria decision-making methods. Omega, 96, 102254.

Mukhametzyanov, I. (2021). Specific character of objective methods for determining weights of criteria in MCDM problems: Entropy, CRITIC and SD. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 76-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402076i

OECD (2017). Available Online: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/ (accessed on 05.07.2021)

Opricovic, S. (1998). Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 2(1), 5-21.

Pamucar, D., Žižović, M., Biswas, S., & Božanić, D. (2021). A new logarithm methodology of additive weights (LMAW) for multi-criteria decision-making: Application in logistics. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering. 19(3). Special Issue, 361-380.

Peng, Y. (2015). Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods. Annals of Operations Research, 234(1), 95-110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-012-1253-8

Podvezko, V. (2011). The comparative analysis of MCDA methods SAW and COPRAS. Engineering Economics, 22(2), 134-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.22.2.310

Pramanik, P. K. D., Biswas, S., Pal, S., Marinković, D., & Choudhury, P. (2021). A Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Resource Selection in Mobile Crowd Computing. Symmetry, 13(9), 1713.

Roy, Bernard (1968). "Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE)". La Revue d'Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO) (8): 57–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/196802V100571

Saaty, T. L. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. M. GrawHill, New York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21236/ADA214804

Shanian, A. A., & Savadogo, O. (2006). A material selection model based on the concept of multiple attribute decision making. Materials & Design, 27(4), 329-337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2004.10.027

Von Winterfeldt, D., & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioural research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wang, P., Zhu, Z., & Wang, Y. (2016). A novel hybrid MCDM model combining the SAW, TOPSIS and GRA methods based on experimental design. Information Sciences, 345, 27-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2016.01.076

Wang, Y. M., & Luo, Y. (2010). Integration of correlations with standard deviations for determining attribute weights in multiple attribute decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 51(1-2), 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2009.07.016

Zavadskas, E. K., & Kaklauskas, A. (1996). Multicriteria Evaluation of Building (Pastatų sistemotechninis įvertinimas). Vilnius: Technika.

Zavadskas, E. K., & Podvezko, V. (2016). Integrated determination of objective criteria weights in MCDM. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 15(02), 267-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622016500036

Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010). A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 159-172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.10

Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014). State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods. Technological and economic development of economy, 20(1), 165-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.892037

Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., & Zakarevicius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika ir elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810

Zhao, H., Zhao, H., & Guo, S. (2018). Comprehensive performance evaluation of electricity grid corporations employing a novel MCDM model. Sustainability, 10(7), 2130.

Published
2022-06-18
How to Cite
Pala, O. (2022). A mixed-integer linear programming model for aggregating multi–criteria decision making methods. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 5(2), 260-286. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame0318062022p