A VIKOR and TOPSIS focused reanalysis of the MADM methods based on logarithmic normalization

Decision and policy-makers in multi-criteria decision-making analysis take into account some strategies in order to analyze outcomes and to finally make an effective and more precise decision. Among those strategies, the modification of the normalization process in the multiple-criteria decision-making algorithm is still a question due to the confrontation of many normalization tools. Normalization is the basic action in defining and solving a MADM problem and a MADM model. Normalization is the first, also necessary, step in solving, i.e. the application of a MADM method.  It is a fact that the selection of normalization methods has a direct effect on the results. One of the latest normalization methods introduced is the Logarithmic Normalization (LN) method. This new method has a distinguished advantage, reflecting in that a sum of the normalized values of criteria always equals 1. This normalization method had never been applied in any MADM methods before. This research study is focused on the analysis of the classical MADM methods based on logarithmic normalization. VIKOR and TOPSIS, as the two famous MADM methods, were selected for this reanalysis research study. Two numerical examples were checked in both methods, based on both the classical and the novel ways based on the LN. The results indicate that there are differences between the two approaches. Eventually, a sensitivity analysis is also designed to illustrate the reliability of the final results.

[1]  Yucel R. Kahraman,et al.  Robust Sensitivity Analysis for Multi-Attribute Deterministic Hierarchical Value Models , 2012 .

[2]  Serafim Opricovic,et al.  A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning , 2009 .

[3]  Reza Baradaran Kazemzadeh,et al.  PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Rita Almeida Ribeiro,et al.  Normalization Techniques for Multi-Criteria Decision Making: Analytical Hierarchy Process Case Study , 2016, DoCEIS.

[5]  C. Hwang,et al.  TOPSIS for MODM , 1994 .

[6]  Saeed Safari,et al.  Ranking Normalization Methods for Improving the Accuracy of SVM Algorithm by DEA Method , 2000 .

[7]  M. Sayadi,et al.  Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem with interval numbers , 2009 .

[8]  Mohammad Noureddine,et al.  Route planning for hazardous materials transportation: Multi-criteria decision-making approach , 2019, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering.

[9]  Živko Erceg,et al.  Integrated MCDM model for processes optimization in supply chain management in wood company , 2019 .

[10]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  A Sensitivity analysis in MCDM problems: A statistical approach , 2018, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering.

[11]  Jurgita Antucheviciene,et al.  Evaluation of Ranking Accuracy in Multi-Criteria Decisions , 2006, Informatica.

[12]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  Multi-criteria decision making: An example of sensitivity analysis , 2017 .

[13]  Luis M. Camarinha-Matos,et al.  Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method , 2018, Int. J. Inf. Decis. Sci..

[14]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  Selection of a location for the development of multimodal logistics center: Application of single-valued neutrosophic MABAC model , 2019, Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications.

[15]  Morteza Yazdani,et al.  VIKOR and its Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey , 2014, Int. J. Strateg. Decis. Sci..

[16]  Rita Almeida Ribeiro,et al.  Dynamic MCDM with future knowledge for supplier selection , 2014, J. Decis. Syst..

[17]  Juan Carlos Leyva López,et al.  An Empirical Study of the Consequences of Coordination Modes on Supporting Multicriteria Group Decision Aid Methodologies , 2015, J. Decis. Syst..

[18]  Darko Bozanic,et al.  Multi-criteria FUCOM – Fuzzy MABAC model for the selection of location for construction of single-span bailey bridge , 2019, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering.

[19]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  A New Logarithmic Normalization Method in Games Theory , 2008, Informatica.

[20]  Aleksandar Janković,et al.  Methods for assigning weights to decision makers in group AHP decision-making , 2019, Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering.

[21]  Amin Zadeh Sarraf,et al.  Developing TOPSIS method using statistical normalization for selecting knowledge management strategies , 2013 .

[22]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[23]  Dragan Pamučar,et al.  NORMALIZED WEIGHTED GEOMETRIC BONFERRONI MEAN OPERATOR OF INTERVAL ROUGH NUMBERS – APPLICATION IN INTERVAL ROUGH DEMATEL-COPRAS , 2018, Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering.

[24]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Bertrand Mareschal,et al.  Banks a multicriteria, promethee-based, decision support system for the evaluation of the international banking sector , 1992 .

[26]  Ali Jahan,et al.  A state-of-the-art survey on the influence of normalization techniques in ranking: Improving the materials selection process in engineering design , 2015 .

[27]  Peng Wang,et al.  A novel hybrid MCDM model combining the SAW, TOPSIS and GRA methods based on experimental design , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[28]  A. Fayek,et al.  A Topsis‐Based Approach for Prioritized Aggregation in Multi‐Criteria Decision‐Making Problems , 2016 .

[29]  Morteza Yazdani,et al.  An integrated fuzzy ANP–QFD approach for green building assessment , 2016 .

[30]  TingHao Chen Using Hybrid MCDM Model for Enhancing the Participation of Teacher in Recreational Sports , 2011, J. Decis. Syst..

[31]  Prasenjit Chatterjee,et al.  Investigating the Effect of Normalization Norms in Flexible Manufacturing Sytem Se- lection Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods , 2014 .

[32]  Jyrki Wallenius,et al.  An early history of multiple criteria decision making , 2016 .