Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry

Anojkumar, L.; Ilangkumaran, M.; Sasirekha, V.

doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2013.10.028

Cited by 222 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A balance between a maximum group utility of the majority, obtained by concordance that represents the utility measure S i and a minimum of individual regret of the opponent, obtained by discordance that represents the regret measure R i is ensured by the compromise solution of ELECTRE method. However, the computational effort required by ELECTRE is more than the VIKOR method (Anojkumar et al, 2014).…”

Section: Comparison Of Results From the Mcdm Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey

Deveci

Demirel

John

et al. 2015

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Comparison Of Results From the Mcdm Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey

Deveci

Demirel

John

et al. 2015

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The VIKOR method is an effective MCDM tool, particularly when the decision maker is not able, or does not know to express his/her preference at the beginning of system design (Chatterjee et al, 2009;San Cristóbal, 2011;Anojkumar et al, 2014). The obtained compromise solution can be accepted because it provides a maximum 'group utility' of the 'majority', and a minimum of the individual regret of the 'opponent'.…”

Section: Vikor Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative analysis of VIKOR method and its variants

Chatterjee¹,

Chakraborty²

2016

10.5267/j.dsl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The VIKOR (Vlse Kriterijumska Optimizacija Kompromisno Resenje which means multicriteria optimization and compromise solution, in Serbian) method has already become a quite popular multi-criteria decision making tool for its computational simplicity and solution accuracy. This method focuses on selecting and ranking from a set of feasible alternatives, and determines compromise solution for a problem with conflicting criteria to help the decision maker in reaching a final course of action. It determines the compromise ranking list based on the particular measure of closeness to the ideal solution. Depending upon the type of decision problem and necessity of the decision maker, apart from VIKOR method, different variants of it, like comprehensive VIKOR, fuzzy VIKOR, regret theory-based VIKOR, modified VIKOR and interval VIKOR methods have also been subsequently developed. In this paper, the ranking performance of original VIKOR method and its five variants is analyzed based on two demonstrative examples. It is observed that interval VIKOR method performs unsatisfactorily and when the information in a decision problem is imprecise, fuzzy VIKOR method should always be preferred. But, for any decision problem, original VIKOR is the best method for solution without unnecessarily complicating the related mathematical computations.

show abstract

“…Ref. [5] have proposed methodology consists of 3 stages: Identification of the criteria to be used in the model, FAHP computation and Ranking the alternative using VIKOR, TOPSIS, ELECTRE and PROMETHEE. The Weight of the criteria is computed using FAHP method.…”

Section: A Topsismentioning

confidence: 99%

An Identification of Better Engineering College with Conflicting Criteria using Adaptive TOPSIS

Lakshmi¹,

Venkatesan²,

Atkinson³

2016

IJMECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Students like to find better engineering college for their higher education. It is very challenging to find the better engineering college with conflicting criteria. In this research, the criterion such as academic reputation and achievements, infrastructure, fees structure, location, quality of the faculty, research facilities and other criterion are considered to find the better engineering college. Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) is the most well known branch of decision making under the presence of conflicting criteria. TOPSIS is one of the MCDM technique widely applied to solve the problems which involves many number of criteria. In this research, TOPSIS is Adaptive and applied to find better engineering college. To evaluate the proposed methodology the parameters such as time complexity, space complexity, sensitivity analysis and rank reversal are considered. In this comparative analysis, better results are obtained for Adaptive TOPSIS compared to COPRAS.

show abstract

Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry

Cited by 222 publications

References 79 publications

Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey

Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making for carbon dioxide geological storage in Turkey

A comparative analysis of VIKOR method and its variants

An Identification of Better Engineering College with Conflicting Criteria using Adaptive TOPSIS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About