IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v311y2022i2d10.1007_s10479-020-03718-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple criteria ranking method based on functional proximity index: un-weighted TOPSIS

Author

Listed:
  • V. Liern

    (University of Valencia)

  • B. Pérez-Gladish

    (University of Oviedo)

Abstract

The technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) is a widely used ranking method which provides a composite index representing the relative proximity of each decision alternative to an ideal solution. The relative proximity index construction relays on the use of a single criterion aggregation approach. Its output, regardless the certainty or uncertainty nature of the problem’s data, is usually a real number. In TOPSIS classical approach alternatives are ordered based on these numbers. The closer the number to 1, the higher the position of the alternative in the ranking. However, although the relative proximity index can be highly sensible to the weighting scheme, as far as the authors of this work know, the relative proximity index has never been treated as a function. In this work, a new TOPSIS approach is proposed in which weights are not fixed in an exact way a priori. On the contrary, they are handled as decision variables in a set of optimization problems where the objective is to maximize the relative proximity of each alternative to the ideal solution. The only possible a priori information about the weights is that related to the existence of upper and lower bounds in their values. This information is incorporated into the optimization problems as constraints. The result is a new relative proximity index which is a function depending on the values of the weights. This feature of the proposed method could be useful in some decision situations in which the determination of subjective precise weights from decision makers could be problematic.

Suggested Citation

  • V. Liern & B. Pérez-Gladish, 2022. "Multiple criteria ranking method based on functional proximity index: un-weighted TOPSIS," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1099-1121, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:311:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03718-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-020-03718-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-020-03718-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-020-03718-1?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Ouenniche, Jamal & Pérez-Gladish, Blanca & Bouslah, Kais, 2018. "An out-of-sample framework for TOPSIS-based classifiers with application in bankruptcy prediction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 111-116.
    3. Alper, Değer & Başdar, Canan, 2017. "A Comparison of TOPSIS and ELECTRE Methods: An Application on the Factoring Industry," Business and Economics Research Journal, Uludag University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 627-646, July.
    4. Yeh, Chung-Hsing & J. Willis, Robert & Deng, Hepu & Pan, Hongqi, 1999. "Task oriented weighting in multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(1), pages 130-146, November.
    5. Mareschal, Bertrand, 1988. "Weight stability intervals in multicriteria decision aid," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 54-64, January.
    6. Canós, L. & Liern, V., 2008. "Soft computing-based aggregation methods for human resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(3), pages 669-681, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Tania, Fernández-García & Vicente, Liern & Blanca, Pérez-Gladish & Fernando, Rubiera-Morollón, 2022. "Measuring the territorial effort in research, development, and innovation from a multiple criteria approach: Application to the Spanish regions case," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).

    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. Tania, Fernández-García & Vicente, Liern & Blanca, Pérez-Gladish & Fernando, Rubiera-Morollón, 2022. "Measuring the territorial effort in research, development, and innovation from a multiple criteria approach: Application to the Spanish regions case," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2021. "An Alternative Aggregation Process for Composite Indexes: An Application to the Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 443-467, January.
    3. Olga Blasco-Blasco & Marina Liern-García & Aarón López-García & Sandra E. Parada-Rico, 2021. "An Academic Performance Indicator Using Flexible Multi-Criteria Methods," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-19, September.
    4. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    5. Meløn, Mønica García & Aragonés Beltran, Pablo & Carmen González Cruz, M., 2008. "An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 754-765, October.
    6. Yan Xu & Chung-Hsing Yeh, 2017. "Sustainability-based selection decisions for e-waste recycling operations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 531-552, January.
    7. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-41, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Cinzia Colapinto & Raja Jayaraman & Fouad Ben Abdelaziz & Davide La Torre, 2020. "Environmental sustainability and multifaceted development: multi-criteria decision models with applications," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 405-432, October.
    10. Marttunen, Mika & Haara, Arto & Hjerppe, Turo & Kurttila, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Tolvanen, Anne, 2023. "Parallel and comparative use of three multicriteria decision support methods in an environmental portfolio problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 842-859.
    11. Parreiras, R.O. & Kokshenev, I. & Carvalho, M.O.M. & Willer, A.C.M. & Dellezzopolles, C.F. & Nacif, D.B. & Santana, J.A., 2019. "A flexible multicriteria decision-making methodology to support the strategic management of Science, Technology and Innovation research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 725-739.
    12. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Towards Sustainable Entrepreneurship Holistic Construct," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-33, November.
    13. Giovanni Ávila-Flores & Judith Juárez-Mancilla & Gustavo Hinojosa-Arango & Plácido Cruz-Chávez & Juan Manuel López-Vivas & Oscar Arizpe-Covarrubias, 2020. "A Practical Index to Estimate Mangrove Conservation Status: The Forests from La Paz Bay, Mexico as a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Maria Cunha & João Marques & Dragan Savić, 2020. "A Flexible Approach for the Reinforcement of Water Networks Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(14), pages 4469-4490, November.
    15. Francesco Ciardiello & Andrea Genovese, 2023. "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 967-994, June.
    16. Chang, Yu-Hern & Yeh, Chung-Hsing, 2004. "A new airline safety index," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 369-383, May.
    17. Tom Pape, 2020. "Prioritising data items for business analytics: Framework and application to human resources," Papers 2012.13813, arXiv.org.
    18. Wolters, W. T. M. & Mareschal, B., 1995. "Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 281-290, March.
    19. Tim Schröder & Lars-Peter Lauven & Beatriz Beyer & Nils Lerche & Jutta Geldermann, 2019. "Using PROMETHEE to assess bioenergy pathways," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 287-309, June.
    20. van Huylenbroeck, G., 1995. "The conflict analysis method: bridging the gap between ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and ORESTE," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 490-502, May.

    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:spr:annopr:v:311:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03718-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.