IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tsa/wpaper/0178mss.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A method based on the ideal and nadir solutions for stochastic MADM problems

Author

Listed:
  • Yan-Ping Jiang
  • Hai-Ming Liang
  • Minghe Sun

    (UTSA)

Abstract

Many real life decision making problems can be modeled as stochastic multi-attribute decision making (MADM) problems. A novel method for stochastic MADM problems is developed based on the ideal and nadir solutions as in the classical TOPSIS method. In a stochastic MADM problem, the evaluations of the alternatives with respect to the different attributes are represented by discrete stochastic variables. According to stochastic dominance rules, the probability distributions of the ideal and nadir variates, both are discrete stochastic variables, are defined and determined for a set of stochastic variables. A metric is proposed to measure the distance between two discrete stochastic variables. The ideal solution is a vector of ideal variates and the nadir solution is vector of nadir variates for the multiple attributes. As in the classical TOPSIS method, the relative closeness of an alternative is determined by its distances from the ideal and nadir solutions. The rankings of the alternatives are determined using the relative closeness. Examples are presented to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. Through the examples, several significant advantages of the proposed method over some existing methods are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Yan-Ping Jiang & Hai-Ming Liang & Minghe Sun, 2014. "A method based on the ideal and nadir solutions for stochastic MADM problems," Working Papers 0178mss, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
  • Handle: RePEc:tsa:wpaper:0178mss
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://interim.business.utsa.edu/wps/mss/0012MSS-061-2014.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Prospect theory and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 961-971, October.
    2. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, December.
    3. Zaras, Kazimierz, 2001. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute stochastic dominance for determinist and stochastic evaluation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 305-314, April.
    4. Martel, Jean M. & d'Avignon, Gilles R., 1982. "Projects ordering with multicriteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 56-69, May.
    5. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    6. Zaras, Kazimierz, 2004. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute dominance for deterministic, stochastic and fuzzy decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 196-206, November.
    7. Fan, Zhi-Ping & Liu, Yang & Feng, Bo, 2010. "A method for stochastic multiple criteria decision making based on pairwise comparisons of alternatives with random evaluations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 906-915, December.
    8. Bawa, Vijay S., 1975. "Optimal rules for ordering uncertain prospects," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 95-121, March.
    9. Martel, Jean-Marc & D'Avignon, Gilles R. & Couillard, Jean, 1986. "A fuzzy outranking relation in multicriteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 258-271, May.
    10. Nowak, Maciej, 2004. "Preference and veto thresholds in multicriteria analysis based on stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 339-350, October.
    11. Moshe Leshno & Haim Levy, 2002. "Preferred by "All" and Preferred by "Most" Decision Makers: Almost Stochastic Dominance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1074-1085, August.
    12. Theodor J Stewart, 2005. "Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 445-466, Springer.
    13. Nowak, Maciej, 2007. "Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1626-1640, March.
    14. D'Avignon, G. R. & Vincke, Ph., 1988. "An outranking method under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 311-321, September.
    15. Fan, Zhi-Ping & Ma, Jian & Jiang, Yan-Ping & Sun, Yong-Hong & Ma, Louis, 2006. "A goal programming approach to group decision making based on multiplicative preference relations and fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 311-321, October.
    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. Durbach, Ian N., 2014. "Outranking under uncertainty using scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 98-108.
    2. Fan, Zhi-Ping & Liu, Yang & Feng, Bo, 2010. "A method for stochastic multiple criteria decision making based on pairwise comparisons of alternatives with random evaluations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 906-915, December.
    3. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    4. Jiang, Yanping & Liang, Xia & Liang, Haiming & Yang, Ningman, 2018. "Multiple criteria decision making with interval stochastic variables: A method based on interval stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 632-643.
    5. Nowak, Maciej, 2006. "INSDECM--an interactive procedure for stochastic multicriteria decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(3), pages 1413-1430, December.
    6. Maciej Nowak, 2010. "Interactive Multicriteria Decision Aiding Under Risk—Methods and Applications," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91, October.
    7. Zaras, Kazimierz, 2001. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute stochastic dominance for determinist and stochastic evaluation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 305-314, April.
    8. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    9. Nowak, Maciej, 2004. "Preference and veto thresholds in multicriteria analysis based on stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 339-350, October.
    10. Kallio, Markku & Dehghan Hardoroudi, Nasim, 2018. "Second-order stochastic dominance constrained portfolio optimization: Theory and computational tests," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 675-685.
    11. Jia Liu & Zhiping Chen & Giorgio Consigli, 2021. "Interval-based stochastic dominance: theoretical framework and application to portfolio choices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 307(1), pages 329-361, December.
    12. Light, Bar & Perlroth, Andres, 2021. "The Family of Alpha,[a,b] Stochastic Orders: Risk vs. Expected Value," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    13. Azibi, R. & Vanderpooten, D., 2003. "Aggregation of dispersed consequences for constructing criteria: The evaluation of flood risk reduction strategies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 397-411, January.
    14. Maciej Nowak & Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2013. "Interactive procedure for a multiobjective stochastic discrete dynamic problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 315-330, October.
    15. Su-min Yu & Zhi-jiao Du & Xu-dong Lin & Han-yang Luo & Jian-qiang Wang, 2020. "A Stochastic Dominance-Based Approach for Hotel Selection under Probabilistic Linguistic Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-25, September.
    16. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2011. "Investment decisions under uncertainty--A methodological review on forest science studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    17. Spyridaki, Niki-Artemis & Banaka, Stefania & Flamos, Alexandros, 2016. "Evaluating public policy instruments in the Greek building sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 528-543.
    18. Post, Thierry & Kopa, Miloš, 2013. "General linear formulations of stochastic dominance criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 321-332.
    19. Thierry Post & Iňaki Rodríguez Longarela, 2021. "Risk Arbitrage Opportunities for Stock Index Options," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 100-113, January.
    20. Maciej Nowak & Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2022. "A trade-off multiobjective dynamic programming procedure and its application to project portfolio selection," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1155-1181, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    stochastic MADM; TOPSIS; ranking; ideal and nadir solutions; relative closeness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • C69 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Other

    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:tsa:wpaper:0178mss. 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: Wendy Frost (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbutsus.html .

    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.