IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijidsc/v10y2018i1p19-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method

Author

Listed:
  • Nazanin Vafaei
  • Rita A. Ribeiro
  • Luis M. Camarinha-Matos

Abstract

Data normalisation is essential for decision-making methods because data has to be numerical and comparable to be aggregated into a single score per alternative. In multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM), normalisation must convert criteria values into a common scale, thus, enabling rating and ranking of alternatives. Therefore, it is a challenge to select a suitable normalisation technique to represent an appropriate mapping from source data to a common scale. There are some attempts in the literature to address the subject of normalisation, but it is still an open question which technique is more appropriate for any MCDM method. Our research contribution is an assessment approach for evaluating normalisation techniques. Here, we focus on six well-known normalisation techniques and on TOPSIS method. The proposed assessment process provides a more robust evaluation and selection of the best normalisation technique for usage in TOPSIS.

Suggested Citation

  • Nazanin Vafaei & Rita A. Ribeiro & Luis M. Camarinha-Matos, 2018. "Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method," International Journal of Information and Decision Sciences, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(1), pages 19-38.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijidsc:v:10:y:2018:i:1:p:19-38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=90667
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nora Sharkasi & Nguyen Vo Hien Chau & Jay Rajasekera, 2023. "Export Potential Analysis of Vietnamese Bottled Coconut Water by Incorporating Criteria Weights of MCDM into the Gravity of Trade Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-26, July.
    2. Agnieszka Kurdyś-Kujawska & Agnieszka Sompolska-Rzechuła & Joanna Pawłowska-Tyszko & Michał Soliwoda, 2021. "Crop Insurance, Land Productivity and the Environment: A Way forward to a Better Understanding," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Gomes, Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro, 2021. "A novel version of the TODIM method based on the exponential model of prospect theory: The ExpTODIM method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(3), pages 1042-1055.
    4. Alao, Moshood Akanni & Popoola, Olawale M. & Ayodele, Temitope Rapheal, 2021. "Selection of waste-to-energy technology for distributed generation using IDOCRIW-Weighted TOPSIS method: A case study of the City of Johannesburg, South Africa," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 162-183.
    5. Agnieszka Sompolska-Rzechuła & Agnieszka Kurdyś-Kujawska, 2022. "Assessment of the Development of Poverty in EU Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Irene Daskalopoulou & Athanasia Karakitsiou, 2020. "Regional Social Capital and Economic Growth: Exploratory Evidence from Testing the Virtuous Spiral vs. Vicious Cycle Model for Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Na Li & Rudi Hakvoort & Zofia Lukszo, 2021. "Cost Allocation in Integrated Community Energy Systems—Social Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Mehdi Rajabi Asadabadi & Hadi Badri Ahmadi & Himanshu Gupta & James J. H. Liou, 2023. "Supplier selection to support environmental sustainability: the stratified BWM TOPSIS method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(1), pages 321-344, March.
    9. Ali, Tausif & Aghaloo, Kamaleddin & Chiu, Yie-Ru & Ahmad, Munir, 2022. "Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic in planning the future energy systems of developing countries using an integrated MCDM approach in the off-grid areas of Bangladesh," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 25-38.
    10. Małgorzata Trojanowska & Krzysztof Nęcka, 2020. "Selection of the Multiple-Criiater Decision-Making Method for Evaluation of Sustainable Energy Development: A Case Study of Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Nomeda Dobrovolskienė & Anastasija Pozniak, 2021. "Simple Additive Weighting versus Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to an Ideal Solution: which method is better suited for assessing the sustainability of a real estate project," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 8(4), pages 180-196, June.
    12. Marcio Pereira Basilio & Valdecy Pereira & Fatih Yigit, 2023. "New Hybrid EC-Promethee Method with Multiple Iterations of Random Weight Ranges: Applied to the Choice of Policing Strategies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-34, October.
    13. Janis Edmunds Daugavietis & Raimonda Soloha & Elina Dace & Jelena Ziemele, 2022. "A Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Methods for Sustainability Assessment of District Heating Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Renan Favarão da Silva & Marjorie Maria Bellinello & Gilberto Francisco Martha de Souza & Sara Antomarioni & Maurizio Bevilacqua & Filippo Emanuele Ciarapica, 2021. "Deciding a Multicriteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Method to Prioritize Maintenance Work Orders of Hydroelectric Power Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Alam Md Moshiul & Roslina Mohammad & Fariha Anjum Hira, 2023. "Alternative Fuel Selection Framework toward Decarbonizing Maritime Deep-Sea Shipping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-37, March.
    16. Doukas, H. & Arsenopoulos, A. & Lazoglou, M. & Nikas, A. & Flamos, A., 2022. "Wind repowering: Unveiling a hidden asset," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijidsc:v:10:y:2018:i:1:p:19-38. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=306 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.