A Novel Parsimonious Best Worst Method for Evaluating Travel Mode Choice

Abstract

There is an obvious trade-off between the amount of the gained information from user surveys and low cost and time efforts of the survey. In this study, we propose a Parsimonious Best Worst Method (P-BWM) to unburden the evaluators from the large number of the pairwise comparisons originated by numerous factors and alternatives required by the Best Worst Method (BWM) in the complex decision problems. The new Parsimonious BWM model assigns priorities to many elements by contrasting pair wisely some reference elements, also it combines the simplicity of direct evaluations with the consistency and reliability of BWM approach. The composed Parsimonious BWM technique has been experimented and validated in a real world problem of Mersin city in Turkey, to evaluate travel mode alternatives. Moreover, a comparative analysis has been applied to the correlation of the adopted outcomes between BWM and P-BWM. INDEX TERMSMultiple criteria analysis, Best Worst Method, Parsimonious preference information, Pairwise comparison matrix, Travel mode choice.

Application of fuzzy TOPSIS for prioritization of patients on elective surgeries waiting list - A novel multi-criteria decision-making approach

“…After examination of 15 minutes, if a surgeon takes on average 30 seconds for a pairwise comparison, then a surgeon will require a continuous 39.25 hours (7.5 hours physical examination time plus 31.75 hours of pairwise comparison) to evaluate only 30 patients. Similarly, BWM requires or 2𝑛 − 3 pairwise comparisons (Pamučar et al, 2020;Moslem, 2023) meaning that 31 pairwise comparisons against each patient are still required which translates into approximately 15.5 hours of continuous examination of 30 patients. As this is humanly not possible for the surgeon, such pairwise comparison MCDM methods are, therefore, practically not possible to implement in case of prioritization of patients.…”

“…These are one of the simplest models that has good explanatory predictive power as they can explain the data with a least possible parameter (Zhang et al, 2020). Only (𝑛 − 1) pairwise comparison required are required in parsimonious AHP (Abastante et al, 2019) and parsimonious BWM (Moslem, 2023) models. Parsimonious AHP and parsimonious BWM are new techniques with only few application thus the question on applicability remains open in terms of limitation and application conditions (Ammirato et al, 2022;Moslem, 2023).…”

“…Only (𝑛 − 1) pairwise comparison required are required in parsimonious AHP (Abastante et al, 2019) and parsimonious BWM (Moslem, 2023) models. Parsimonious AHP and parsimonious BWM are new techniques with only few application thus the question on applicability remains open in terms of limitation and application conditions (Ammirato et al, 2022;Moslem, 2023). Considering 17 criteria, 16 pairwise comparisons will take 4 hours or continuous 13.5 hours (including 7.5 hours physical examination) to evaluate 30 patients a day.…”

Integrated Spherical Decision-Making Model for Managing Climate Change Risks in Africa

“…Considering the limitations of prior research, effectively addressing climate change risks and successfully implementing adaptation activities demands an approach that provides a holistic managerial perspective. This method should explicitly take into account multiple criteria to enhance decision outcomes [40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59]. Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques, adept at structuring complex problems and accommodating various criteria, are well-suited for this purpose [55,[60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79].…”

Identification of Product Innovation Path Incorporating the FOS and BERTopic Model from the Perspective of Invalid Patents

“…After generating specific innovative solutions, the above solutions need to be evaluated and ranked using the BWM. The specific steps are as follows [30,31]:…”