When is a decision-making method trustworthy? Criteria for evaluating multi-criteria decision-making methods

International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1171-1187

  Saaty, Thomas L ^a   Ergu, Daji ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b SOUTHWEST UNIVERSITY FOR NATIONALITIES   (China)

Author keywords

conflicting criteria; decision problems; evaluation; Multi criteria decision making methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 84954166193     PISSN: 02196220     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S021962201550025X     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. T. Hanne, Intelligent Strategies for Meta Multiple Criteria Decision Making (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001).
2. T. L. Saaty, An Eigenvalue allocation model in contingency planning, University of Pennsylvania 19 (1972) 72.
3. T. L. Saaty, The Analytical Hierarchical Process (John Wiley, New York, 1980).
4. T. L. Saaty, The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys (Springer, 2005), pp. 345-405.
5. Z. Turskis and E. K. Zavadskas, A new additive ratio assessment (ARAS) method in multicriteria decision-making, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 16(2) (2010) 159-172.
6. E. Zavadskas and A. Kaklauskas, Multicriteria Evaluation of Building (Pastatu siste-motechninis ivertinimas). (Technika, Vilnius, 1996).
7. M. Zeleny, Compromise programming, in Multiple Criteria Decision Making (1973), pp. 262-301.
8. A. Gabus and E. Fontela, World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL, DEMATEL Report NO. 1 Battelle Geneva Research Center, Geneva, Switzerland (1972).
9. S. Greco, B. Matarazzo et al., Rough approximation of a preference relation by dominance relations, European Journal of Operational Research 117(1) (1999) 63-83.
10. S. Greco, B. Matarazzo et al., Rough approximation by dominance relations, International Journal of Intelligent Systems 17(2) (2002) 153-171.
11. B. Roy, R. Benayoun et al., ELECTRE Société d'Economie et de Mathématique appliquées, Paris, 1996 (in French.)
12. B. Roy, The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods, in Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid (Springer, 1990), pp. 155-183.
13. J. D. Lowrance and T. D. Garvey, Evidential reasoning: A developing concept, in IEEE Int. Conf. on Cybernetics and Society (Seattle, WA, 1982), pp. 6-9.
14. J. T. Buchanan, A naive approach for solving MCDM problems: The GUESS method, Journal of the Operational Research Society 48(2) (1997) 202-206.
15. S. M. Lee, Goal Programming for Decision Analysis (Auerbach, Philadelphia, 1972).
16. J.-L. Deng, Introduction to grey system theory, The Journal of Grey System 1(1) (1989) 1-24.
17. C. A. Bana e Costa and J.-C. Vansnick, MACBETH - An interactive path towards the construction of cardinal value functions, International transactions in operational Research 1(4) (1994) 489-500.
18. J. D. McCa®rey, Using the Multi-Attribute Global Inference of Quality (MAGIQ) technique for software testing, Sixth Int. Conf. Information Technology: New Generations, 2009. ITNG'09 (IEEE, 2009), pp. 738-742.
19. R. L. Keeney and R. L. Keeney, Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeo®s (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1976).
20. P. Humphreys, Application of multi-attribute utility theory, Decision Making and Change in Human A®airs (Springer, 1977), pp. 165-207.
21. R. R. Yager, On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 18(1) (1988) 183-190.
22. D. Filev and R. R. Yager, Analytic properties of maximum entropy OWA operators, Information Sciences 85(1) (1995) 11-27.
23. C. Tam, T. K. Tong et al., Site layout planning using nonstructural fuzzy decision support system, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 128(3) (2002) 220-231.
24. C. Tam, T. K. Tong et al., Non-structural fuzzy decision support system for evaluation of construction safety management system, International Journal of Project Management 20(4) (2002) 303-313.
25. C. Tam, T. K. Tong et al., Comparing non-structural fuzzy decision support system and analytical hierarchy process in decision-making for construction problems, European Journal of Operational Research 174(2) (2006) 1317-1324.
26. P. Hansen and F. Ombler, A new method for scoring additive multi-attribute value models using pairwise rankings of alternatives, Journal of MultiCriteria Decision Analysis 15(34) (2008) 87-107.
27. J.-P. Brans, P. Vincke et al., How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method, European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2)(1986) 228-238.
28. J.-P. Brans and B. Mareschal, PROMETHEE methods, in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys (Springer, 2005) 163-186.
29. C. W. Churchman and R. L. Acko®, An approximate measure of value, Operations Research 2(2) (1954) 172-187.
30. X. Xu, The SIR method: A superiority and inferiority ranking method for multiple criteria decision making, European Journal of Operational Research 131(3) (2001) 587-602.
31. C.-L. Hwang and K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making (Springer, 1981).
32. E. Jacquet-Lagreze and J. Siskos. Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multi-criteria decision-making, the UTA method, European Journal of Operational Research 10(2) (1982) 151-164.
33. P. G. Keen, Value analysis: Justifying decision support systems, MIS Quarterly 5(1) (1981) 1-15.
34. L. W. Zimmerman and G. D. Hart, Value Engineering: A Practical Approach for Owners, Designers, and Contractors (Van Nostrand Reinhold New York, USA, 1982).
35. D. E. Parker, Value Engineering Theory (Lawrence D Miles Value Foundation, 1985).
36. A. E. Mudge, Value Engineering: A Systematic Approach (J. Pohl Associates, 1989).
37. S. Opricović, An extension of compromise programming to the solution of dynamic multicriteria problem, Optimization Techniques (Springer, 1980), pp. 508-517.
38. S. Opricovic and G.-H. Tzeng, Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods, European Journal of Operational Research 178(2) (2007) 514-529.
39. E. Triantaphyllou and S. H. Mann, An examination of the e®ectiveness of multidimensional decision-making methods: A decision-making paradox, Decision Support Systems 5(3) (1989) 303-312.
40. P. C. Fishburn, Letter to the editor - additive utilities with incomplete product sets: Application to priorities and assignments, Operations Research 15(3) (1967) 537-542.
41. D. Von Winterfeldt and W. Edwards, Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986).
42. B. F. Hobbs, What can we learn from experiments in multiobjective decision analysis?, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics 16(3) (1986) 384-394.
43. K. R. MacCrimmon, An overview of multiple objective decision making, in Cochran J. L., Zeleny M. (Eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Making, University of South Carolina Press (Columbia, 1973), pp. 18-44.
44. V. M. Ozernoy, A framework for choosing the most appropriate discrete alternative multiple criteria decision-making method in decision support systems and expert systems in Toward Interactive and Intelligent Decision Support Systems (Springer, 1987) 56-64.
45. V. M. Ozernoy, Choosing the \best" multiple criteria decision-making method, Infor 30(2) (1992) 159-171.
46. A. Guitouni and J.-M. Martel, Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method, European Journal of Operational Research 109(2) (1998) 501-521.
47. R. Karni, P. Sanchez et al., A comparative study of multiattribute decision making methodologies, Theory and Decision 29(3) (1990) 203-222.
48. S.H. Zanakis,A. Solomon etal., Multi-attribute decision making:A simulation comparison of select methods, European Journal of Operational Research 107(3) (1998) 507-529.
49. P. Salminen, J. Hokkanen et al., Comparing multicriteria methods in the context of environmental problems, European Journal of Operational Research 104(3) (1998) 485-496.
50. D. L. Olson, Comparison of three multicriteria methods to predict known outcomes, European Journal of Operational Research 130(3) (2001) 576-587.
51. K. T. Cho, Multicriteria decision methods: An attempt to evaluate and unify, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 37(9) (2003) 1099-1119.
52. D. L. Olson, Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 40(7-8) (2004) 721-727.
53. S. Opricovic and G.-H. Tzeng, Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research 156(2) (2004) 445-455.
54. K. Peniwati, Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 46(7) (2007) 935-947.
55. S. Hajkowicz and A. Higgins, A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management, European Journal of Operational Research 184(1) (2008) 255-265.
56. Y. Peng, G. Kou, G. X. Wang and Y. Shi, FAMCDM: A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms, Omega-International Journal of Management Science 39(6) (2011) 677-689.
57. J. Geldermann and A. Schobel, On the similarities of some multicriteria decision analysis methods, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 18(3-4) (2011) 219-230.
58. G. Kou, Y. Lu, Y. Peng and Y. Shi, Evaluation of classification algorithms using MCDM and rank correlation, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 11(1) (2012) 197-225, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0219622012500095.
59. S. H. Zolfani, M. Sedaghat and E. K. Zavadskas, Performance evaluating of rural ICT centers (telecenters), applying fuzzy AHP, SAW-G and TOPSIS Grey, a case study in Iran, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 18(2) (2012) 364-387.
60. K. Mela, T. Tiainen et al., Comparative study of multiple criteria decision making methods for building design, Advanced Engineering Informatics 26(4) (2012) 716-726.
61. G. Kou, D. Ergu and J. Shang, Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: Adapting hadamard model to mitigate judgement contradiction, European Journal of Operational Reseach 236(1) (2013) 261-271.
62. M. Velasquez and P. T. Hester, An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods, International Journal of Operations Research 10(2) (2013) 56-66.
63. G. Kou and C. Lin, A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP, European Journal of Operational Reseach 235 (2014) 225-232.
64. L. Anojkumara, M. Ilangkumarana and V. Sasirekha, Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry, Expert Systems with Applications 41(6) (2014) 2964-2980.
65. S. Tadić, S. Zečević et al., A novel hybrid MCDM model based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy VIKOR for city logistics concept selection, Expert Systems with Applications 41(18) (2014) 8112-8128.
66. G. Kou, Y. Peng and G. Wang, Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial risk analysis using MCDM methods, Information Sciences 27 (2014) 1-12.
67. P. Chithambaranathan, N. Subramanian, A. Gunasekaran and P. L. K. Palaniappan, Service supply chain environmental performance evaluation using grey based hybrid MCDM approach, International Journal of Production Economics 166 (2015) 163-176.
68. R. Piroozfar, Fuzzy Logic: A Rule-Based Approach, in Search of a Justified Decision-Making Process in Urban Planning (Universitátsbibliothek, 2010).
69. J. Aczel and F. S. Roberts, On the possible merging functions, Mathematical Social Sciences 17(3) (1989) 205-243.
70. T. L. Saaty, Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making-why pair-wise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors the analytic hierarchy/network process (To the memory of my beloved friend Professor Sixto Rios Garcia), Revista De La Real Academia De Ciencias Exactas Fisicas Y Naturales Serie a-Matematicas 102(2) (2008) 251-318.
71. A. Saltelli, S. Tarantola et al., A quantitative model-independent method for global sensitivity analysis of model output, Technometrics 41(1) (1999) 39-56.
72. A. Saltelli, M. Ratto et al., Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer (Wiley-Interscience, 2008).
73. H. M. Wagner, Global sensitivity analysis, Operations Research 43(6) (1995) 948-969.
74. L. L. LeShan and H. Margenau, Einstein's Space and Van Gogh's Sky: Physical Reality and Beyond (Macmillan, New York, 1982).
75. T. L. Saaty and N. Begicevic, The scope of human values and human activities in decision making, Applied Soft Computing 10(4) (2010) 963-974.
76. Z. Y. Khairullah and S. Zionts, An experiment with some algorithms for multiple criteria decision making, in Multiple Criteria Decision Making Theory and Application, (Springer, 1980), pp. 150-159.
77. C. W. Park, A con°ict resolution choice model, Journal of Consumer Research 5(2) (1978) 124-137.
78. I. S. Currim and R. K. Sarin, A comparative evaluation of multiattribute consumer preference models, Management Science 30(5) (1984) 543-561.
79. T. L. Saaty, Fundamentals of the analytic network process - Dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network, Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering 13(2) (2004) 129-157.
80. E. G. Guba, Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries, ECTJ 29(2) (1981) 75-91.
81. B. F. Hobbs, V. Chankong et al., Does choice of multicriteria method matter? An experiment in water resources planning, Water Resources Research 28(7) (1992) 1767-1779.