×

Comparison of first aggregation and last aggregation in fuzzy group TOPSIS. (English) Zbl 1201.91037

Summary: The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), one of the major multi attribute decision making (MADM) techniques, ranks the alternatives according to their distances from the ideal and the negative ideal solution. In real evaluation and decision making problems, it is vital to involve several people and experts from different functional areas in decision making process. Also under many conditions, crisp data are inadequate to model real-life situations, since human judgments including preferences are often vague and cannot estimate his preference with an exact numerical value. Therefore aggregation of fuzzy concept, group decision making and TOPSIS methods that we denote “fuzzy group TOPSIS” is more practical than original TOPSIS.There are two approaches for aggregating values including relative importance of evaluation criteria with respect to the overall objective and rating of alternatives with respect to each criterion in fuzzy group TOPSIS: (1) First aggregation, (2) Last aggregation. In first aggregation approach weight of each criterion and rating of alternatives with respect to each criterion gained from decision makers are aggregated at first and TOPSIS method then apply to these aggregate values. In last aggregation approach weight of each criterion and rating of alternatives with respect to each criterion gained from decision makers are used in TOPSIS method directly. Distance of each alternative from the ideal and the negative ideal solution are calculated then aggregated for finding relative closeness of each alternative to the ideal solution. Two examples are presented to highlight the procedure of the proposed methods at the end of this paper. We want to test if variation in decision makers’ opinions is high, last aggregation method is more precise than first aggregation and vice versa when this variation is low, first aggregation method is as precise as last aggregation but faster than this method.

MSC:

91B06 Decision theory
90C70 Fuzzy and other nonstochastic uncertainty mathematical programming
90B05 Inventory, storage, reservoirs
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Hwang, C. L.; Yoon, K., Multiple Attribute Decision Making (1981), Springer-Verlag: Springer-Verlag Berlin · Zbl 0453.90002
[2] Kim, G.; Park, C. S.; Yoon, K. P., Identifying investment opportunities for advanced manufacturing systems with comparative-integrated performance measurement, Int. J. Production Econ., 50, 1, 23-33 (1997)
[3] Hwang, C. L.; Lin, M. J., Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria (1987), Springer-Verlag: Springer-Verlag Berlin · Zbl 0631.90001
[4] Shanian, A.; Savadogo, O., TOPSIS multiple-criteria decision support analysis for material selection of metallic bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte fuel cell, J. Power Sources, 159, 2, 1095-1104 (2006)
[5] Olson, D. L., Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models, Math. Comput. Model., 40, 7-8, 721-727 (2004) · Zbl 1066.90054
[6] Deng, H.; Yeh, C. H.; Willis, R. J., Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights, Comput. Oper. Res., 27, 10, 963-973 (2000) · Zbl 0970.90038
[7] Jahanshahloo, G. R.; Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F.; Davoodi, A. R., Extension of TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data: interval efficiency, Math. Comput. Model., 49, 5-6, 1137-1142 (2009) · Zbl 1165.90498
[8] Seçme, N. Y.; Bayrakdarogľu, A.; Kahraman, C., Fuzzy performance evaluation in Turkish banking sector using analytic hierarchy process and TOPSIS, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 9, 11699-11709 (2009)
[9] Gumus, A. T., Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 2, 4067-4074 (2009)
[10] Yurdakula, M.; Tansel İc, Y., Analysis of the benefit generated by using fuzzy numbers in a TOPSIS model developed for machine tool selection problems, J. Mater. Process. Technol., 209, 310-317 (2009)
[11] Chamodrakas, I.; Alexopoulou, N.; Martakos, D., Customer evaluation for order acceptance using a novel class of fuzzy methods based on TOPSIS, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 4, 7409-7415 (2009)
[12] Celik, M.; Cebi, S.; Kahraman, C.; Deha Er, I., Application of axiomatic design and TOPSIS methodologies under fuzzy environment for proposing competitive strategies on Turkish container ports in maritime transportation network, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 3(1), 4541-4557 (2009)
[13] Izadikhah, M., Using Hamming distance to extend TOPSIS in a fuzzy environment, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 231, 1, 200-207 (2008) · Zbl 1172.90020
[14] Mahdavi, I.; Mahdavi-Amiri, N.; Heidarzade, A.; Nourifar, R., Designing a model of fuzzy TOPSIS in multiple criteria decision making, Appl. Math. Comput., 206, 2, 607-617 (2008) · Zbl 1177.90240
[15] Jahanshahloo, G. R.; Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F.; Izadikhah, M., Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data, Appl. Math. Comput., 181, 2, 1544-1551 (2006) · Zbl 1102.90343
[16] Wang, Y. M.; Elhag, T. M.S., Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment, Expert Syst. Appl., 31, 2, 309-319 (2006)
[17] Chen, C. T., Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 114, 1, 1-9 (2000) · Zbl 0963.91030
[18] Chen, C. T.; Linb, C. T.; Huang, S. F., A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management, Int. J. Production Econ., 102, 2, 289-301 (2005)
[19] Wang, T. C.; Chang, T. H., Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment, Expert Syst. Appl., 33, 4, 870-880 (2007)
[20] Dagdeviren, M.; Yavuz, S.; Kılınç, N., Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 4, 8143-8151 (2008)
[21] Wang, T. C.; Lee, H. D., Developing a fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on subjective weights and objective weights, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 5, 8980-8985 (2009)
[22] Boran, F. E.; Genc, S.; Kurt, M.; Akay, D., A multi-criteria intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making for selection of supplier with TOPSIS method, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 8, 11363-11368 (2009)
[23] Wang, Y. J.; Lee, H. S., Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making, Comput. Math. Appl., 53, 11, 1762-1772 (2007) · Zbl 1152.90498
[24] Chu, T. C.; Lin, Y. C., An interval arithmetic based fuzzy TOPSIS model, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 8, 10870-10876 (2009)
[25] Shih, H. S.; Shyurb, H. J.; Lee, E. S., An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making, Math. Comput. Model., 45, 7-8, 801-813 (2007) · Zbl 1187.90166
[26] Saremi, M.; Mousavi, S. F.; Sanayei, A., TQM consultant selection in SMEs with TOPSIS under fuzzy environment, Expert Syst. Appl., 36, 8, 2742-2749 (2009)
[27] Kaufmann, A.; Gupta, M. M., Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic: Theory and Applications (1991), Van Nostrand Reinhold: Van Nostrand Reinhold New York · Zbl 0754.26012
[28] Zimmermann, H. J., Fuzzy Set Theory and its Applications (1991), Kluwer Academic Publishers: Kluwer Academic Publishers Boston, Dordrecht, London · Zbl 0719.04002
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.