Comprehensive evaluation method of the poultry house indoor environment based on gray relation analysis and analytic hierarchy process

Abstract

Due to the antagonism and synergy among environmental factors in the poultry house, the influence process becomes extremely complex. As a result, it is difficult to predict and evaluate the degree of such influence accurately. In this paper, we study the poultry house environment factor and its relationship with poultry production performance, using the gray relation analysis ( GRA ) to filtrate the main factors that influence the evaluation of the poultry house environment. Put forward using the gray relation degree ( GRD ) to improve the method for structuring the judgment matrix, and weights are more objective and reasonable. The evaluation index system and evaluation model are constructed through the analytic hierarchy process ( AHP ). It is expected that the comprehensive evaluation of the indoor environment status of the poultry house can guide the optimization of the environmental control in the poultry house and obtain better production indicators of the poultry. In this study, the experimental broiler house was enclosed in autumn. Because of the ventilation system, the indoor environment is still affected by the outdoor environment. The top 3 in the calculation of weights were outdoor environment (0.4315), indoor temperature (0.2384), and indoor air quality (0.1687), which were consistent with experience. From October 24 to 27, the environmental evaluation values of the experimental broiler house were {2.4367, 2.8149, 2.3857, 2.5669}, that is, the evaluation results were {good, good, good, good}; consistent with the expert manual judgment. The correctness and practicability of the proposed method were verified. This paper provides a scientific basis for environmental evaluation and environmental control in the poultry house.

New energy power system operation security evaluation based on the SWOT analysis

“…Owing to its flexibility about the analysis of the expert preferences without considering the type of scale, it maintains the stability even if the range of standards and alternatives is wide. They validated the advantages of MARCOS methodology compared to traditional multi-criteria techniques including: Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC) 26 , Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) 27 , Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS) 28 and TOPSIS 29 . MARCOS has been successfully applied in different areas by considering the above-mentioned examples from the literature.…”

“…Its core includes the index system of the evaluated object and the selected evaluation method 24 . At present, the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) method corresponds to a powerful tool being widely used for comprehensive evaluation, such as analytic hierarchy process (AHP) 23 – 27 , entropy weight (EW) 25 – 28 , cloud method (CM) 24 , 28 , grey relation analysis (GRA) 29 , analytic network process (ANP) 30 – 32 , Decision Making Trialand Evaluation Laboratory (DEMETEL) 31 – 35 , Više-Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Rešenje (VIKOR) 33 – 39 , and technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) 28 , 36 – 39 evaluation method based on evidence theory. These MCDM evaluation methods are currently being used for ranking of indicators, risk identification and evaluation, sustainable development evaluation between countries, economic evaluation, social evaluation, environmental protection evaluation, technical evaluation, and other issues.…”

new energy power system security operation evaluation based on the SWOT analysis

“…maintains its stability even if the range of standards and alternatives is wide. They showed that the advantages of the MARCOS methodology with traditional multi-criteria techniques: Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC) 23 , Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) 24 , Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS) 25 and TOPSIS 26 . MARCOS has been successfully applied in many different areas by considering the above-mentioned examples from the literature.…”

“…Its core includes the index system of the evaluated object and the selected comprehensive evaluation method 21 . At present, the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) method is a powerful tool to widely used for comprehensive evaluation, such as analytic hierarchy process (AHP) [20][21][22][23][24] , entropy weight (EW) [22][23][24][25] , cloud method (CM) 21,25 , grey relation analysis (GRA) 26 , analytic network process (ANP) [27][28][29] , Decision Making Trialand Evaluation Laboratory (DEMETEL) [28][29][30][31][32] , Više-Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Rešenje (VIKOR) [30][31][32][33][34][35][36] , technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) 25,[33][34][35][36] evaluation method based on evidence theory. These MCDM evaluation methods are currently used in the ranking of indicators, risk identification and evaluation, sustainable development evaluation between countries, economic evaluation, social evaluation, environmental protection evaluation, technical evaluation and other issues.…”

College Students Online Education Evaluation Through SWOT Analysis During COVID-19

“…Its core consists of the evaluation object's index system and the thorough evaluation method chosen [47]. The MCDM method is currently a powerful tool for comprehensive evaluation, such as Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) [48], Entropy Weight (EW) [49], Cloud Method (CM) [50], Grey Relation Analysis (GRA) [51], Analytic Network Process (ANP) [52], Decision Making Trialand Evaluation Laboratory (DEMETEL) [53], Više-Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Rešenje (VIKOR) [54], Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) [55] evaluation method based on evidence theory. There are several applications for the MCDM evaluation methods currently in use, including the ranking of indices, the identification and evaluation of risk and the comparison of sustainable development between nations as well as economic, social, environmental, and technical assessments.…”