IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jjmath/v2022y2022i1n6725318.html

Two New Approaches (RAMS‐RATMI) in Multi‐Criteria Decision‐Making Tactics

Author

Listed:
  • Reda M. S. Abdulaal
  • Omer A. Bafail

Abstract

When a decision must be made, a tool called multi‐criteria decision‐making (MCDM) is used to assess and select alternatives among numerous criteria. For a wide variety of complex problems, MCDM methods have demonstrated usefulness in finding the optimal solutions. Despite the abundance of MCDM methods available today, there has been slow progress in developing new methodologies in MCDM in the past decade. In this context, this paper presents new MCDM tools which ranks alternatives based on median similarity (RAMS) between optimal alternatives and other alternatives. RAMS is an extension to the most recently developed technique that used perimeter similarity (RAPS). This paper also introduces a further tool that combines the RAMS method with the multiple criteria ranking by alternative trace (MCRAT) methodology using a majority index and the concept of the VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method. This tool is ranking the alternatives based on the trace to median index (RATMI). An illustration of the use of RAMS and RATMI is given through a case study of ranking different materials for the selection of break booster valve body in a vehicle. The validity of the new two techniques was tested against seven well‐known MCDM techniques (ARAS, SAW, TOPSIS, COPRAS, VIKOR, WASPAS, and MOORA) using fifteen real problems data taken from the literature. The RATMI technique was more promising than RAPS and RAMS for 87% and 93% of the fifteen difficulties, respectively, according to the results of the correlation coefficient tests between the developed techniques and the selected seven techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Reda M. S. Abdulaal & Omer A. Bafail, 2022. "Two New Approaches (RAMS‐RATMI) in Multi‐Criteria Decision‐Making Tactics," Journal of Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2022(1).
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jjmath:v:2022:y:2022:i:1:n:6725318
    DOI: 10.1155/2022/6725318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6725318
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2022/6725318?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. Katarina Urošević & Zoran Gligorić & Igor Miljanović & Čedomir Beljić & Miloš Gligorić, 2021. "Novel Methods in Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Process (MCRAT and RAPS)—Application in the Mining Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(16), pages 1-21, August.
    2. P. L. Yu, 1973. "A Class of Solutions for Group Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(8), pages 936-946, April.
    3. Mahmut Baydaş & Dragan Pamučar, 2022. "Determining Objective Characteristics of MCDM Methods under Uncertainty: An Exploration Study with Financial Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Morteza Yazdani & Pascale Zaraté & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems," Post-Print hal-02879091, HAL.
    5. 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.
    6. Reda M. S. Abdulaal & Omer A. Bafail, 2021. "A Comparative Study between GLP and GBWM," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-9, April.
    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. Mahmut Baydaş & Mustafa Yılmaz & Željko Jović & Željko Stević & Sevilay Ece Gümüş Özuyar & Abdullah Özçil, 2024. "A comprehensive MCDM assessment for economic data: success analysis of maximum normalization, CODAS, and fuzzy approaches," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, December.
    2. Thi Kim Lien Nguyen & Hoang Nga Le & Bach Dang Ha & Quoc Ngu Nguyen & Van Phi Pham & Van Dan Dinh, 2024. "Evaluating the Business Performance of Seaport Enterprises in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-21, October.
    3. Milad Zamanifar & Seyed Mohammad Seyedhoseyni, 2017. "Recovery planning model for roadways network after natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 699-716, June.
    4. Omer F. Baris, 2018. "Timing effect in bargaining and ex ante efficiency of the relative utilitarian solution," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 547-556, June.
    5. Chen, Lisa Y. & Wang, Tien-Chin, 2009. "Optimizing partners' choice in IS/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(1), pages 233-242, July.
    6. Valipour Malakshah, Mohammad Reza & Amini, Zahra, 2026. "Intersection importance assessment for an operationally resilient urban traffic network: A multi-criteria decision-making-based framework," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 266(PA).
    7. Su, Dan & Zhang, Lijun & Peng, Hua & Saeidi, Parvaneh & Tirkolaee, Erfan Babaee, 2023. "Technical challenges of blockchain technology for sustainable manufacturing paradigm in Industry 4.0 era using a fuzzy decision support system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    8. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    9. Mehmet Şahin, 2024. "Ensemble decision making for logistics center location," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 30527-30561, December.
    10. María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Waste Segregation FMEA Model Integrating Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set and the PAPRIKA Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-29, August.
    11. Domenech, B. & Ferrer-Martí, L. & Pastor, R., 2015. "Hierarchical methodology to optimize the design of stand-alone electrification systems for rural communities considering technical and social criteria," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 182-196.
    12. Chunqiao Tan & Xiaohong Chen, 2013. "Interval‐Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Multicriteria Group Decision Making Based on VIKOR and Choquet Integral," Journal of Applied Mathematics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2013(1).
    13. Hisham Alidrisi, 2021. "An Innovative Job Evaluation Approach Using the VIKOR Algorithm," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Roberto Cervelló Royo & Fernando García García & Francisco Guijarro-Martínez & Ismael Moya-Clemente, 2011. "Housing Ranking: a model of equilibrium between buyers and sellers expectations," ERSA conference papers ersa11p314, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Büsing, Christina & Goetzmann, Kai-Simon & Matuschke, Jannik & Stiller, Sebastian, 2017. "Reference points and approximation algorithms in multicriteria discrete optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(3), pages 829-840.
    16. Gómez-Limón, José A. & Gutiérrez-Martín, Carlos & Riesgo, Laura, 2016. "Modeling at farm level: Positive Multi-Attribute Utility Programming," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 17-27.
    17. Serafim Opricovic, 2009. "A Compromise Solution in Water Resources Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(8), pages 1549-1561, June.
    18. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    19. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Ruan, Da, 2008. "Evaluation of software development projects using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 464-475.
    20. Gawlik Remigiusz & Głuszak Michał & Małkowska Agnieszka, 2017. "The Measurement of Housing Preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia, Sciendo, vol. 17(1), pages 31-43, June.

    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:wly:jjmath:v:2022:y:2022:i:1:n:6725318. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1469 .

    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.