IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i15p3375-d1208809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interactive Internet Framework Proposal of WASPAS Method: A Computational Contribution for Decision-Making Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Flavio Barbara

    (School of Economics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-010, Brazil)

  • Marcos dos Santos

    (Systems and Computing Department, Military Institute of Engineering, Rio de Janeiro 22290-270, Brazil)

  • Antônio Sergio Silva

    (School of Economics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-010, Brazil)

  • Miguel Ângelo Lellis Moreira

    (Production Engineering Department, Federal Fluminense University, Rio de Janeiro 24210-240, Brazil)

  • Luiz Paulo Fávero

    (School of Economics, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 05508-010, Brazil)

  • Enderson Luiz Pereira Júnior

    (Production Engineering Department, Federal Fluminense University, Rio de Janeiro 24210-240, Brazil)

  • Wagner dos Anjos Carvalho

    (Administration Department, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21941-630, Brazil)

  • Fernando Martins Muradas

    (Naval Systems Analysis Centre, Operational Research Department, Rio de Janeiro 20091-000, Brazil)

  • Daniel Augusto de Moura Pereira

    (Production Engineering Department, Federal Fluminense University, Rio de Janeiro 24210-240, Brazil)

  • Anderson Gonçalves Portella

    (Production Engineering Department, Veiga de Almeida University, Rio de Janeiro 20271-020, Brazil)

Abstract

Concerning the development of computational tools and solutions as a decision-making aid, this paper presents the results of the waspasWEB project, which strives to provide decision-makers with a readily accessible mechanism to employ the weighted aggregated sum product assessment (WASPAS) method. The social contribution of the project encompasses the development of a user-friendly and publicly accessible internet tool, as well as a package launched on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) to serve the community of users of the R language. The use of operational research methodologies is crucial to justify decisions, and this effort seeks to advance the adoption of such methodologies, offering managers, researchers, and the general public an intuitive and easily accessible multi-criteria decision-making tool. In this way, we present the technical specifications, usability, and interactivity of the user with the computational platform, being validated its viability through a hypothetical case study. At the end of the research, it exposes the limitations and feasibility of the proposed computational model along with future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Flavio Barbara & Marcos dos Santos & Antônio Sergio Silva & Miguel Ângelo Lellis Moreira & Luiz Paulo Fávero & Enderson Luiz Pereira Júnior & Wagner dos Anjos Carvalho & Fernando Martins Muradas & Dan, 2023. "Interactive Internet Framework Proposal of WASPAS Method: A Computational Contribution for Decision-Making Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-27, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:15:p:3375-:d:1208809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/15/3375/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/15/3375/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans, 1994. "PROMCALC & GAIA: a new decision support system for multicriteria decision aid," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9349, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1984. "Prométhée: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9305, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    4. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Dong, Yucheng & Liu, Yating & Liang, Haiming & Chiclana, Francisco & Herrera-Viedma, Enrique, 2018. "Strategic weight manipulation in multiple attribute decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 154-164.
    6. Maghrabie, Hesham F. & Beauregard, Yvan & Schiffauerova, Andrea, 2019. "Grey-based Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis approach: Addressing uncertainty at complex decision problems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 366-379.
    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. Marchant, Thierry, 1998. "Cardinality and the borda score," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 464-472, July.
    2. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Inter-Criteria Dependencies-Based Decision Support in the Sustainable wind Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, February.
    3. Barbosa, Ailson de Souza & Shayani, Rafael Amaral & Oliveira, Marco Aurélio Gonçalves de, 2018. "A multi-criteria decision analysis method for regulatory evaluation of electricity distribution service quality," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 38-48.
    4. Marco Cinelli & Matteo Spada & Wansub Kim & Yiwen Zhang & Peter Burgherr, 2021. "MCDA Index Tool: an interactive software to develop indices and rankings," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 82-109, March.
    5. Pires, Ana & Chang, Ni-Bin & Martinho, Graça, 2011. "An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setúbal Peninsula, Portugal," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 7-21.
    6. Pinto, Maria Cristina & Crespi, Giulia & Dell'Anna, Federico & Becchio, Cristina, 2023. "Combining energy dynamic simulation and multi-criteria analysis for supporting investment decisions on smart shading devices in office buildings," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    7. Ji Chen & Jinsheng Wang & Tomas Baležentis & Fausta Zagurskaitė & Dalia Streimikiene & Daiva Makutėnienė, 2018. "Multicriteria Approach towards the Sustainable Selection of a Teahouse Location with Sensitivity Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Khannoussi, Arwa & Meyer, Patrick & Chaubet, Aurore, 2023. "A multi-criteria decision aiding approach for upgrading public sewerage systems and its application to the city of Brest," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    9. Alfandari, Laurent, 2004. "Choice Rules with Size Constraints for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," ESSEC Working Papers DR 04002, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    10. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Fernando Pérez-Rodríguez & José María Martín-Martín & João C. Azevedo, 2019. "Planning for Democracy in Protected Rural Areas: Application of a Voting Method in a Spanish-Portuguese Reserve," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    11. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    12. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    13. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    14. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    15. Junyi Chai & Zhiquan Weng & Wenbin Liu, 2021. "Behavioral Decision Making in Normative and Descriptive Views: A Critical Review of Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    16. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    17. Laila Oubahman & Szabolcs Duleba, 2022. "A Comparative Analysis of Homogenous Groups’ Preferences by Using AIP and AIJ Group AHP-PROMETHEE Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, May.
    18. repec:eco:journ2:2017-04-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Jelena Kilić Pamuković & Katarina Rogulj & Daniela Dumanić & Nikša Jajac, 2020. "A Sustainable Approach for the Maintenance of Asphalt Pavement Construction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Ewa Roszkowska & Bartłomiej Jefmański, 2021. "Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Synthetic Measure (I-VIFSM) Based on Hellwig’s Approach in the Analysis of Survey Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Albadvi, Amir & Chaharsooghi, S. Kamal & Esfahanipour, Akbar, 2007. "Decision making in stock trading: An application of PROMETHEE," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 673-683, March.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:15:p:3375-:d:1208809. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.