IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0165171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Evaluation of Suitability of Selected Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Large-Scale Agent-Based Simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Petr Tučník
  • Vladimír Bureš

Abstract

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) can be formally implemented by various methods. This study compares suitability of four selected MCDM methods, namely WPM, TOPSIS, VIKOR, and PROMETHEE, for future applications in agent-based computational economic (ACE) models of larger scale (i.e., over 10 000 agents in one geographical region). These four MCDM methods were selected according to their appropriateness for computational processing in ACE applications. Tests of the selected methods were conducted on four hardware configurations. For each method, 100 tests were performed, which represented one testing iteration. With four testing iterations conducted on each hardware setting and separated testing of all configurations with the–server parameter de/activated, altogether, 12800 data points were collected and consequently analyzed. An illustrational decision-making scenario was used which allows the mutual comparison of all of the selected decision making methods. Our test results suggest that although all methods are convenient and can be used in practice, the VIKOR method accomplished the tests with the best results and thus can be recommended as the most suitable for simulations of large-scale agent-based models.

Suggested Citation

  • Petr Tučník & Vladimír Bureš, 2016. "Experimental Evaluation of Suitability of Selected Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods for Large-Scale Agent-Based Simulations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0165171
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165171
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165171&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0165171?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tesfatsion, Leigh S., 2002. "Agent-Based Computational Economics: Growing Economies from the Bottom Up," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5075, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Constantin Zopounidis & Emilios C. C Galariotis & Michael Doumpos & Stavroula Sarri & Kostas Andriosopoulos, 2015. "Multiple criteria decision aiding for finance: An updated bibliographic survey," Post-Print hal-02879842, HAL.
    3. Peng, Yi & Kou, Gang & Wang, Guoxun & Shi, Yong, 2011. "FAMCDM: A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 677-689, December.
    4. Peter C. Fishburn, 1967. "Letter to the Editor—Additive Utilities with Incomplete Product Sets: Application to Priorities and Assignments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 537-542, June.
    5. Cynthia Nikolai & Gregory Madey, 2009. "Tools of the Trade: A Survey of Various Agent Based Modeling Platforms," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(2), pages 1-2.
    6. Khalid Saeed, 2014. "Jay Forrester's operational approach to economics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(4), pages 233-261, October.
    7. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lin, Cheng-Wei & Opricovic, Serafim, 2005. "Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1373-1383, July.
    8. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    9. Liu, Chui-Hua & Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lee, Ming-Huei, 2012. "Improving tourism policy implementation – The use of hybrid MCDM models," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 413-426.
    10. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kuang-Hua Hu & Wei Jianguo & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2017. "Risk Factor Assessment Improvement for China’s Cloud Computing Auditing Using a New Hybrid MADM Model," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 737-777, May.
    2. Hossein Sabzian & Mohammad Ali Shafia & Ali Maleki & Seyeed Mostapha Seyeed Hashemi & Ali Baghaei & Hossein Gharib, 2019. "Theories and Practice of Agent based Modeling: Some practical Implications for Economic Planners," Papers 1901.08932, arXiv.org.
    3. Torsten Trimborn & Philipp Otte & Simon Cramer & Maximilian Beikirch & Emma Pabich & Martin Frank, 2020. "SABCEMM: A Simulator for Agent-Based Computational Economic Market Models," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 55(2), pages 707-744, February.
    4. Alev Taskin Gumus & A. Yesim Yayla & Erkan Çelik & Aytac Yildiz, 2013. "A Combined Fuzzy-AHP and Fuzzy-GRA Methodology for Hydrogen Energy Storage Method Selection in Turkey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Kusi-Sarpong, Simonov & Orji, Ifeyinwa Juliet & Gupta, Himanshu & Kunc, Martin, 2021. "Risks associated with the implementation of big data analytics in sustainable supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    6. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Kazim Topuz & Ali Dag & Asil Oztekin, 2019. "An AHP-IFT Integrated Model for Performance Evaluation of E-Commerce Web Sites," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1345-1355, December.
    7. Ngo-Hoang, Dai-Long, 2019. "A research paper of Hossein Sabzian (2019), Theories and Practice of Agent based Modeling: Some practical Implications for Economic Planners, ArXiv, 54p," AgriXiv xutyz, Center for Open Science.
    8. Pingtao Yi & Weiwei Li & Lingyu Li, 2018. "Evaluation and Prediction of City Sustainability Using MCDM and Stochastic Simulation Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.
    9. Thomas L. Saaty & Daji Ergu, 2015. "When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(06), pages 1171-1187, November.
    10. Hasan Dinçer & Ozlem Olgu Akdeniz & Umit Hacioglu, 2018. "Competitive strategy selection in the European banking sector using a hybrid decision-making approach," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 36(1), pages 213-242.
    11. Hossein Sabzian & Mohammad Ali Shafia & Mehdi Ghazanfari & Ali Bonyadi Naeini, 2020. "Modeling the Adoption and Diffusion of Mobile Telecommunications Technologies in Iran: A Computational Approach Based on Agent-Based Modeling and Social Network Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-36, April.
    12. Wątróbski, Jarosław & Jankowski, Jarosław & Ziemba, Paweł & Karczmarczyk, Artur & Zioło, Magdalena, 2019. "Generalised framework for multi-criteria method selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-124.
    13. Katerina Kabassi, 2021. "Comparing Multi-Criteria Decision Making Models for Evaluating Environmental Education Programs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Witold Torbacki, 2021. "Achieving Sustainable Mobility in the Szczecin Metropolitan Area in the Post-COVID-19 Era: The DEMATEL and PROMETHEE II Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-25, November.
    15. Martin Kügemann & Heracles Polatidis, 2019. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis of Road Transportation Fuels and Vehicles: A Systematic Review and Classification of the Literature," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    16. Sehatpour, Mohammad-Hadi & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Sehatpour, Hesam-eddin, 2017. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for light-duty vehicles in Iran using a multi-criteria approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 295-310.
    17. Sarah Ben Amor & Fateh Belaid & Ramzi Benkraiem & Boumediene Ramdani & Khaled Guesmi, 2023. "Multi-criteria classification, sorting, and clustering: a bibliometric review and research agenda," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 771-793, June.
    18. Arsalan Ahmed Othman & Ahmed K. Obaid & Diary Ali Mohammed Al-Manmi & Mohammad Pirouei & Sarkawt Ghazi Salar & Veraldo Liesenberg & Ahmed F. Al-Maamar & Ahmed T. Shihab & Younus I. Al-Saady & Zaid T. , 2021. "Insights for Landfill Site Selection Using GIS: A Case Study in the Tanjero River Basin, Kurdistan Region, Iraq," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-29, November.
    19. Pašakarnis, Giedrius & Maliene, Vida & Dixon-Gough, Robert & Malys, Naglis, 2021. "Decision support framework to rank and prioritise the potential land areas for comprehensive land consolidation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    20. Ming-Tsang Lu & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng & Hilary Cheng & Chih-Cheng Hsu, 2015. "Exploring mobile banking services for user behavior in intention adoption: using new hybrid MADM model," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 9(3), pages 541-565, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0165171. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.