CAD/CAM System Selection: A Multi-Component Hybrid Fuzzy MCDM Model

Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 2579-2594

  Roshanaei, V ^a   Vahdani, Behnam ^b   Mousavi, S M ^c   Mousakhani, M ^d   Zhang, G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

^b ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^c ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^d ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

Adaptive AHP approach; Computer aided design (CAD); Computer aided manufacturing (CAM); Fuzzy set theory; Genetic algorithm; Linguistic variables; MCDM; TOPSIS

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881562089     PISSN: 2193567X     EISSN: 21914281     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13369-012-0514-9     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Sarker R., Rahman S. M., Bignall B.: Application of multimedia technology in manufacturing: A review. Comput. Ind. 38, 43-52 (1999).
2. Kannan G., Vinay V. P.: Multi-criteria decision making for the selection of CAD/CAM system. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 2(3), 151-159 (2008).
3. Shyur H. J.: COTs evaluation using modified TOPSIS and ANP. Appl. Math. Comput. 177, 251-259 (2006).
4. Kontio, J.: A case study in applying a systematic method for cots selection. In: Proceedings of IEEE, ICSE-18, pp. 201-209 (1996).
5. Leung K. P. R. H., Leung H. K. N.: On the efficiency of domain based cots product selection method. Inf. Softw. Technol. 44, 703-715 (2002).
6. Mikhailov L., Singh M. G.: Fuzzy analytic network process and its application to the development of decision support systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 33, 33-41 (2003).
7. Carney D. J., Wallnau K. C.: A basis for evaluation of commercial software. Inf. Softw. Technol. 40, 851-860 (1998).
8. Min H.: Selection of software: The analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 122, 42-52 (1992).
9. Lai V. S., Trueblood R. P., Wong B. K.: Software selection: a case study of the application of the analytical hierarchical process to the selection of a multimedia authoring system. Inf. Manage. 36, 221-232 (1999).
10. Chien C. F., Wang M. J. J., Wei C. C.: An AHP-based approach to ERP system selection. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 96, 47-62 (2005).
11. Haq A. N., Kannan G.: Design of integration of supplier selection and multi echelon distribution inventory model in a built-to order supply chain environment. Int. J. Prod. Res. 44((10), 1963-1985 (2006).
12. Lee J. W., Kim S. H.: Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Comput. Oper. Res. 27, 367-382 (2000).
13. Teltumbde A.: A framework of evaluating ERP projects. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38, 4507-4520 (2000).
14. Sarkis J., Sundarraj R. P.: Factors for strategic evaluation of enterprise information technologies. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 30, 196-220 (2000).
15. Davis M. A., Badri D., Davis D.: A comprehensive 0-1 goal programming model for project selection. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 19, 243-252 (2001).
16. Wen H. T., Jun D. L., Jau Y. L., Sin J. L., Shaw M. J.: A MCDM approach for sourcing strategy mix decision in IT projects. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 3870-3886 (2010).
17. Semih Ö., Selin S. K., Elif I.: Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Exp. Syst. Appl. 36, 3887-3895 (2009).
18. Wong W. K., Zeng X. H., Au W. M. R., Mok P. Y., Leung S. Y. S.: A fashion mix-and-match expert system for fashion retailers using fuzzy screening approach. Exp. Syst. Appl. 36, 1750-1764 (2009).
19. Ya T. L., Chia L. L., Hsiao C. Y., Tzeng G.-H.: A novel hybrid MCDM approach for outsourcing vendor selection: A case study for a semiconductor company in Taiwan. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 4796-4804 (2010).
20. Au K. F., Wong W. K., Zeng X. H.: Decision model for country site selection of overseas clothing plants. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 29, 408-417 (2006).
21. Lin C. C., Wang W. C., Yu W. D.: Improving AHP for construction with an adaptive AHP approach (A3). Autom. Constr. 17, 180-187 (2008).
22. Mousavi, S. M.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.; Heydar, M.; Ebrahimnejad, S.: Multi-criteria decision-making for plant location selection: an integrated Delphi-AHP-PROMETHEE methodology. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. (2011) doi: 10. 1007/s13369-012-0361-8.
23. Saaty, T. L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980).
24. Goldberg, D.: Genetic Algorithm in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley Publishing, New York (1989).
25. Michalewicz, Z.: Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs. Third ed. Springer, New York (1999).
26. Buckley J. J.: Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 17, 233-247 (1985).
27. Kaufmann, A.; Gupta, M. M.: Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic: Theory and Applications. van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1991).
28. Negi, D. S.: Fuzzy analysis and optimization. Ph. D. Dissertation, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kansas State University (1989).
29. Zimmermann, H. J.: Fuzzy Set Theory and its Applications, second ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1991).
30. Vahdani B., Mousavi S. M., Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R.: Group decision making based on novel fuzzy modified TOPSIS method. Appl. Math. Model. 35, 4257-4269 (2011).
31. Mousavi, S. M.; Jolai, F.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.: A fuzzy stochastic multi-attribute group decision-making approach for selection problems. Group Decis. Negot. (2011) doi: 10. 1007/s10726-011-9259-1.
32. Amiri M., Zandieh M., Vahdani B., Soltani R., Roshanaei V.: An integrated eigenvector-DEA-TOPSIS methodology for portfolio risk evaluation in the FOREX spot market. Exp. Syst. Appl. 37, 509-516 (2010).
33. Vahdani B., Hadipour H.: Extension of the ELECTRE method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Soft Comput. 15(3), 569-579 (2011).
34. Bellman B. E., Zadeh L. A.: Decision-making in a fuzzy environment. Manage. Sci. 17(4), 141-164 (1970).
35. Hwang, C. L.; Yoon, K.: Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Springer, New York (1981).
36. Mojtahedi S. M. H., Mousavi S. M., Makui A.: Project risk identification and assessment simultaneously using multi-attribute group decision making technique. Saf. Sci. 48(4), 499-507 (2010).