The analysis of the quality of the results obtained with the methods of multi‐criteria decisions
By Friedel Peldschus. 2009
53 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Abstract For many decades we have been dealing with problems of multi‐criteria decisions. Numerous methods have been developed in this field and new methods are continuously being created. In the light of a great number of methods currently proposed, it is difficult to gain a profound overview. Comparisons on the performance of various methods are done to a small extent only. When applying the methods, in some cases many mathematical operations are performed, which renders it impossible to sufficiently assess their effect with such a complexity. It is therefore aimed at analysing the peculiarities of several methods in a critical review and to give hints for possible consequences. The analysis is primarily concentrated on the normalisation of indices in the mapping to the interval [1; 0] or [1; ∼ 0]. This includes linear functions (the relative difference and the calculation with interval boundaries) and non‐linear functions (the hyperbolic function, the quadratic and cubic function, the square root and t...
Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/80d361b32af2eb3b0af8bdda1e01364bc76514d3
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Zenonas Turskis
- Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
- Jolanta Tamosaitiene
- Abbas Mardani
- Ahmad Jusoh
- Tomas Balezentis
- Alvydas Balezentis
- Norhayati Zakuan
Citations in the corpus
- Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview (2011, methodology): “The impact of the decision-matrix normalization methods on the decision results has been investigated by many authors (Jüttler 1966; Körth 1969; Stopp 1975; Weitendorf 1976; Zavadskas 1987, 1990; Peldschus 2009; Ginevičius 2008; Zavadskas and Turskis 2008).”
- Risk assessment of construction projects (2010, methodology): “There is a wide range of methods (Ulubeyli and Kazaz 2009; Jakimavicius and Burinskiene 2009a, b; Plebankiewicz 2009; Liaudanskiene et al. 2009; Liu 2009; Dytczak and Ginda 2009; Podvezko 2009) based on multi-criteria utility theory: SAW – Simple Additive Weighting (Ginevičius et al. 2008b); SAW-G (”
- A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision‐making (2010, background): “…investigated by many authors (Jüttler 1966; Körth 1969; Stopp 1975; Weitendorf 1976; Zavadskas 1987; Hovanov 1996; Cloquell and Santamarina 2001; Peldschus 2007, 2009; Ginevicius and Podvezko 2007; Ginevičius 2008; Noorul Haq and Kannan 2007; Brauers et al. 2007; Brauers et al. 2008; Brauers…”