Search

This paper attempts to demystify the stability of CoCoSo ranking method via a comprehensive simulation experiment. In the experiment, matrices of different dimensions are generated via Python with fuzzy data. Stability is investigated via adequacy and partial adequacy tests. The test passes if the ranking order does not change even after changes are made to entities, and the partial pass signifies that the top ranked alternative remains intact. Results infer that CoCoSo method has better stability with respect to change of alternatives compared to criteria; and CoCoSo method shows better stability with respect to partial adequacy test for criteria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Selecting emergency suppliers from a wide range of candidates based on their performance under each criterion can be regarded as a multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) problem. Existing MCDM models to solve the emergency supplier selection problem ignored situations where large-scale suppliers exist, the influence of criteria weights on the robustness of ranking results, and the influence of psychology of regret aversion and disappointment aversion on decision results. To make up for these deficiencies, this paper proposes an MCDM model to solve emergency supplier selection problem with large-scale alternatives. Firstly, to avoid the influence of criteria weights on ranking of alternatives, the Robustness, Correlation, and Standard Deviation (ROCOSD) method is introduced to determine objective weights of criteria based on three objectives. Secondly, the τ-balanced clustering method is applied to cluster large-scale alternatives into balanced clusters. Next, considering the psychology of regret aversion and disappointment aversion of decision makers, a two-stage method is proposed to rank alternatives, which identifies the optimal alternative within each cluster and forms a new cluster consisting of these optimal alternatives in the first stage, and selects the optimal alternative from the new-formed cluster in the second stage. A numerical case is given to validate the proposed model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hydrogen is the new age alternative energy source to combat energy demand and climate change. Storage of hydrogen is vital for a nation's growth. Works of literature provide different methods for storing the produced hydrogen, and the rational selection of a viable method is crucial for promoting sustainability and green practices. Typically, hydrogen storage is associated with diverse sustainable and circular economy (SCE) criteria. As a result, the authors consider the situation a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. Studies infer that previous models for hydrogen storage method (HSM) selection (i) do not consider preferences in the natural language form; (ii) weights of experts are not methodically determined; (iii) hesitation of experts during criteria weight assessment is not effectively explored; and (iv) three-stage solution of a suitable selection of HSM is unexplored. Driven by these gaps, in this paper, authors put forward a new integrated framework, which considers double hierarchy linguistic information for rating, criteria importance through inter-criteria correlation (CRITIC) for expert weight calculation, evidence-based Bayesian method for criteria weight estimation, and combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) for ranking HSMs. The applicability of the developed framework is testified by using a case example of HSM selection in India. Sensitivity and comparative analysis reveal the merits and limitations of the developed framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cloud computing has emerged as a transformative technology in the healthcare industry, but selecting the most suitable CV ("cloud vendor") remains a complex task. This research presents a decision framework for CV selection in the healthcare industry, addressing the challenges of uncertainty, expert hesitation, and conflicting criteria. The proposed framework incorporates FFS ("Fermatean fuzzy set") to handle uncertainty and data representation effectively. The importance of experts is attained via the variance approach, which considers hesitation and variability. Furthermore, the framework addresses the issue of extreme value hesitancy in criteria through the LOPCOW ("logarithmic percentage change-driven objective weighting") method, which ensures a balanced and accurate assessment of criterion importance. Personalized grading of CVs is done via the ranking algorithm that considers the formulation of CoCoSo ("combined compromise solution") with rank fusion, providing a compromise solution that balances conflicting criteria. By integrating these techniques, the proposed framework aims to enhance the rationale and reduce human intervention in CV selection for the healthcare industry. Also, valuable insights are gained from the framework for making informed decisions when selecting CVs for efficient data management and process implementation. A case example from Tamil Nadu is presented to testify to the applicability, while sensitivity and comparison analyses reveal the pros and cons of the framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Transformations in Business & Economics is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Properly designed and installed interior stairs provide safe and convenient access to all residents of the house, including children and elderly people. While safety considerations are paramount for stair design and placement decisions in a two-storey single-family house, sustainability becomes another important factor in these deliberations. Nevertheless, safety and sustainability of the interior stairs can be seen as conflicting objectives in decision-making processes (i.e., while a larger staircase area positively affect residents' climbing ability, it also causes higher energy consumption and material usage). Therefore, increased awareness of stair-project selection processes is required when multi-objective tasks are involved. Seven criteria affecting stair safety and sustainability in a single-family house are identified in this paper. The integrated AHP-MEREC criteria-weighting approach is proposed, to determine their weights in decision-making processes. Four different multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches, ARAS, SAW, TOPSIS and PROMETHEE, were used to determine alternative evaluations. Since the selection of the most suitable MCDM method is full of uncertainties, the novel combined-decision-making approach formally called CORST (COmbining MCDM appRoaches using method STability coefficient) is proposed in this paper. The new method stability coefficient is used to determine the stability and reliability of the specific MCDM approach. Nine U-shaped inside-staircase projects dedicated to a single-family house were evaluated, to test the effectiveness of the CORST approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most remarkable subjects in multi-criteria group decision-making (MCGDM) is determining the weight and importance of criteria. The weighting methods based on inputs are categorized in the manifold group. This paper presents a novel method for weighting the criteria in a network structure. This approach, namely MOWSCER, is used when the relationships among the criteria are modeled by a cause-and-effect directed graph. The directed graph demonstrates the cause and effect relationship among criteria. In the presented method, the criteria are divided into three groups. The basic idea of the criteria segmentation is derived from European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM). These groups include (1) effect criteria, (2) cause criteria, and (3) connector criteria. Then, the connector criteria are allocated fewer weights than the other two types. In other words, the introduced method follows two purposes of decreasing criteria number and appropriate allocating of weights among remaining criteria. Accordingly, first, the connector criteria are detected, so they are assigned less weight, and remained criteria are allocated a proper weight according to their importance. Furthermore, a new weighting method for determining the weights of decision makers (DMs) in group decision-making problems is presented to achieve a comprehensive manner. In the end, to prove the practicality of the proposed method, the weights of criteria and DMs are computed in a case study and two illustrative examples. Besides, to confirm the accuracy of that, it is compared with the DEMATEL method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]