MCDM approach for weighted ranking of candidates in e-voting

The aim of the study is the application of multi-criteria evaluation methods for ranking of candidates in e-voting. Due to the potential to enhance the electoral efficiency in e-voting multiple criteria, such as personality traits, activity and reputation in social media, opinion followers on election area and so on for the selection of qualified personnel can be considered. In this case, the number of criteria excesses in the decision-making stage directed us to the use of a multi-criteria decision making model (MCDM). This paper proposes MCDM for weighted ranking of candidates in e-voting. Criteria for the candidates’ ranking and selection are determined and each voter uses the linguistic scales for the ranking of each candidate. Candidates’ ranking is evaluated according to all criteria. In a numerical study, it is provided the candidates’ evaluation on the base of selected criteria and ranked according to the importance of criteria. To assess the importance of the criteria and to evaluate the suitability of the candidates for each of the criteria, the voters use linguistic variables. In practice, the proposed model can use different evaluation scales for the selection of candidates in e-voting. The proposed model allows selecting a candidate with the competencies based on the criteria set out in the e-voting process and making more effective decisions.

[1]  Abbas Mardani,et al.  Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications – a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014 , 2015 .

[2]  M. Kendall,et al.  Rank Correlation Methods (5th ed.). , 1992 .

[3]  M. Khorami,et al.  Application of Multi Criteria Decision Making approaches for personnel selection problem : A survey , 2015 .

[4]  Rasim M. Alguliyev,et al.  E-Government Formation Challenges and Solution Perspectives , 2016 .

[5]  Siamak Fayyaz Shahandashti,et al.  Electoral Systems Used around the World , 2016, ArXiv.

[6]  Serhat Burmaoglu,et al.  A fuzzy hybrid MCDM approach for professional selection , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[7]  Elif Haykır Hobikoğlu,et al.  Election of Deputy Candidates for Nomination with AHP-Promethee Methods , 2015 .

[8]  Wei-Lung Huang.  The Financial Manager Selection Fuzzy Model , 2017 .

[9]  M. Ilangkumaran,et al.  A hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach of ANP and TOPSIS to evaluate the optimum fuel blend in IC engine , 2015 .

[10]  N. Anh Tuan.  DEVELOPING A GENERALIZED FUZZY MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING FOR PERSONNEL SELECTION , 2018 .

[11]  M. Musia.  The use of e-voting as a new tool of e-participation in modern democracies , 2014 .

[12]  W. Strielkowski,et al.  Modern Technologies in Public Administration Management: A Comparison of Estonia, India and United Kingdom , 2017 .

[13]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  State of art surveys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods , 2014 .

[14]  Rogério Cid Bastos,et al.  Fuzzy MCDM in election prediction , 2001, 2001 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. e-Systems and e-Man for Cybernetics in Cyberspace (Cat.No.01CH37236).

[15]  Milan Nikolić,et al.  Personnel selection using group fuzzy AHP and SAW methods , 2017 .

[16]  Mona F. M. Mursi,et al.  On the Development of Electronic Voting: A Survey , 2013 .

[17]  Lotfi A. Zadeh.  A Very Simple Formula for Aggregation and Multicriteria Optimization , 2016, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

[18]  King-Hang Wang,et al.  A Review of Contemporary E-voting : Requirements , Technology , Systems and Usability , 2017 .

[19]  Vanessa Teague,et al.  A review of E-voting: the past, present and future , 2016, Ann. des Télécommunications.

[21]  Stephen A. Meserve,et al.  Measuring candidate selection mechanisms in European elections: Comparing formal party rules to candidate survey responses , 2018 .

[22]  Dragisa Stanujkic,et al.  Comparative analysis of some prominent MCDM methods: A case of ranking Serbian banks , 2013 .

[23]  Alexander H. Trechsel,et al.  Potential and challenges of e-voting in the European Union , 2016 .

[24]  Yu-Wei Chang,et al.  A new method selection approach for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making , 2013, Appl. Soft Comput..

[25]  A. P. Rotshtein,et al.  Fuzzy multicriteria choice among alternatives: Worst-case approach , 2009 .

[26]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .

[27]  Rasim M. Alguliyev,et al.  A Fuzzy TOPSIS+Worst-Case Model for Personnel Evaluation Using Information Culture Criteria , 2016, Int. J. Oper. Res. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Yueping Zheng.  Explaining Citizens’ E-Participation Usage , 2017 .