Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2016 | vol. 16, iss. 2 | 219--235
Tytuł artykułu

A Data Pre-Processing Model for the Topsis Method

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
TOPSIS is one of the most popular methods of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). Its fundamental role is the establishment of chosen alternatives ranking based on their distance from the ideal and negative-ideal solution. There are three primary versions of the TOPSIS method distinguished: classical, interval and fuzzy, where calculation algorithms are adjusted to the character of input rating decision-making alternatives (real numbers, interval data or fuzzy numbers). Various, specialist publications present descriptions on the use of particular versions of the TOPSIS method in the decision-making process, particularly popular is the fuzzy version. However, it should be noticed, that depending on the character of accepted criteria - rating of alternatives can have a heterogeneous character. The present paper suggests the means of proceeding in the situation when the set of criteria covers characteristic criteria for each of the mentioned versions of TOPSIS, as a result of which the rating of the alternatives is vague. The calculation procedure has been illustrated by an adequate numerical example.(original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
  • Bialystok University of Technology, Poland
  • Afshar, A., Marino, M.A., Saadatpour, M., Afshar, A. (2011). Fuzzy TOPSIS multicriteria decision analysis applied to Karun reservoirs system. Water Resource Management, 25, 545-563.
  • Amiri, M.P. (2010). Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 6218-6224.
  • Amiri, M., Zandieh, M., Soltani, R., Vahdani, B. (2009). A hybrid multi-criteria decisionmaking model for firms competence evaluation. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 12314-12322.
  • Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S.S., Omrani, H. (2011). Application of fuzzy TOPSIS in evaluating sustainable transportation systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 12270-12280.
  • Aydogan, E.K. (2011). Performance measurement model for Turkish aviation firms using the rough-AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 3992-3998.
  • Behzadian, M., Khanmohammadi, O.S., Yazdani, M., Ignatius, J. (2012). A state of the art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 13051-13069.
  • Bottani, E., Rizzi, A. (2006). A fuzzy TOPSIS methodology to support outsourcing of logistics services. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 11, 294-308.
  • Byun, H.S., Lee, K.H. (2005). A decision support system for the selection of a rapid prototyping process using the modified TOPSIS method. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 26, 1338-1347.
  • Cheng, S., Chan, C.W., Huang, G.H. (2002): Using multiple criteria decision analysis for supporting decision of solid waste management. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A, 37, 975-990.
  • Chen, C.T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, 1-9.
  • Chen, M.H., Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Combining gray relation ad TOPSIS concepts for selecting an expatriate host country. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40, 1473-1490.
  • Chu, T.C. (2002). Facility location selection using fuzzy TOPSIS under group decision. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 10, 687-701.
  • Chu, T.C., Lin, Y.C. (2003). A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21, 284-290.
  • Deng, H., Yeh, C.H., Willis, R.J. (2000). Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Research, 27, 963-973.
  • Dubois, D., Prade, H. (1978). Operations on fuzzy numbers. International Journal of Systems Science, 9, 613-626.
  • Erkayman, B., Gundogar, E., Akkaya, G., Ipek, M. (2011). A fuzzy TOPSIS approach for logistics center location problem. Journal of Business Case Studies, 7, 49-54.
  • Ertugrul, I. (2010). Fuzzy group decision making for the selection of facility location. Group Decision and Negotiation, 20, 725-740.
  • Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
  • Ishizaka, A., Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: Methods and software. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  • Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H., Izadikhah, M. (2006a). An algorithmic method to extend TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175, 1375-1384.
  • Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H., Izadikhah, M. (2006b). Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181, 1544-1551.
  • Janic, M. (2003). Multicriteria evaluation of high-speed rail, transrapid maglev and air passenger transport in Europe. Transportation Planning and Technology, 26, 491-512.
  • Kahraman, C., Büyüköykan, G., Ates, N.Y. (2007). A two phase multi-attribute decision-making approach for new product introduction. Information Sciences, 177, 1567-1582.
  • Kannan, G., Pokharel, S., Kumar, P.S. (2009). A hybrid approach using ISM and fuzzy TOPSIS for the selection of reverse logistics provider. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54, 28-36.
  • Krohling, R.A., Campanharo, V.C. (2011). Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A case study for accidents with oil spill in the sea. Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 4190- 4197.
  • Lin, C.T., Tsai, M.C. (2010). Location choice for direct foreign investment in new hospitals in China by using ANP and TOPSIS. Quality Quantity, 44, 375-390.
  • Lin, M.C., Wang, C.C., Chen, M.S., Chang, C.A. (2008). Using AHP and TOPSIS approaches in customer-driven product design process. Computers in Industry, 59, 17-31.
  • Milani, A.S., Shanian, A., Madoliat, R. (2005). The effect of normalization norms in multiple attribute decision making models: A case study in gear material selection. Structural Multidisciplinary Optimization, 29, 312-318.
  • Moore, R.E. (1979). Methods and applications of interval analysis. Studies in Applied and Numerical Mathematics. Madison: University of Wisconsin.
  • Park, J.H., Park, I., Kwun, Y.C., Tan, X. (2011). Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision making problems under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Applied Mathematical Modeling, 35, 2544-2556.
  • Parkan, C., Wu, M.L. (1999). Decision making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 36, 503-523.
  • Sengupta, A., Pal, T.K. (2000). On comparing interval numbers. European Journal of Operational Research, 127, 28-43.
  • Srdjevic, B., Medeiros, Y.D.P., Faria, A.S. (2004). An objective multi criteria evaluation of water management scenarios. Water Resources Management, 18, 35-54.
  • Sun, C.C. (2010). A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 7745-7754.
  • Sun, C.C., Lin, G.T.R. (2009). Using fuzzy TOPSIS method for evaluating the competitive advantages of shopping websites. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 11764-11771.
  • Wang, J.W., Cheng, C.H., Huang, K.C. (2009). Fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS for supplier selection. Applied Soft Computing, 9, 377-386.
  • Wang, T.C., Chang, T.H. (2007). Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 33, 870-880.
  • Wang, T.C., Lee, H.D. (2009). Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 8980-8985.
  • Wang, W.P. (2009). Toward developing agility evaluation of mass customization systems using 2-tuple linguistic computing. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 3439-3447.
  • Yager, R.R. (1981). A procedure for ordering fuzzy subsets of the unit interval. Information Sciences, 24, 143-161. Brought
  • Yang, T., Chou, P. (2005). Solving a multiresponse simulation-optimization problem with discrete variables using a multi-attribute decision making method. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 68, 9-21.
  • Yoon, K., Hwang, C.L. (1985). Manufacturing plant location analysis by multiple attribute decision making: Part I - single plant strategy. International Journal of Production Research, 23, 345-359.
  • Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 333-353. Brought
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.