A simulation comparison of normalization procedures for TOPSIS

Multiattribute decision making (MADM) uses a normalization procedure to transform performance ratings with different data measurement units in a decision matrix into a compatible unit. MADM methods generally use one particular normalization procedure without justifying its suitability. The technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) is one of the most popular and widely applied MADM methods. This study compares four commonly known normalization procedures in terms of their ranking consistency and weight sensitivity when used with TOPSIS to solve the general MADM problem with various decision settings. The comparison study is validated using two performance measures: ranking consistency and weight sensitivity. A large number of MADM problems with varying attributes and alternatives are generated using a new simulation technique. The study results justify the use of the vector normalization procedure for TOPSIS and provide suggestive insights for using other normalization procedures in certain decision settings.

[1]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Letter to the Editor - Additive Utilities with Incomplete Product Sets: Application to Priorities and Assignments , 1967, Oper. Res..

[2]  T. L. Saaty.  A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[3]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[4]  C. Hwang.  Multiple Objective Decision Making - Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1979 .

[5]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications - A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[6]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[7]  B. Roy.  THE OUTRANKING APPROACH AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF ELECTRE METHODS , 1991 .

[8]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications , 1992, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[9]  Martin Weber,et al.  Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making , 1993 .

[10]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[11]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple attribute decision making : an introduction , 1995 .

[12]  Stelios H. Zanakis,et al.  Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  David L. Olson,et al.  Comparison of three multicriteria methods to predict known outcomes , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[14]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[15]  C. Yeh.  A Problem‐based Selection of Multi‐attribute Decision‐making Methods , 2002 .

[16]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis , 2001 .

[17]  Chung-Hsing Yeh,et al.  The Selection of Multiattribute Decision Making Methods for Scholarship Student Selection , 2003 .

[18]  Matthias Ehrgott,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys , 2005 .

[19]  Chung-Hsing Yeh,et al.  Comparing normalization procedures in multiattribute decision making under various problem settings , 2007 .

[20]  Subrata Chakraborty,et al.  Consistency comparison of normalization procedures in multiattribute decision making , 2007 .