This paper aims to present an innovative approach based on two newly developed Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods: COMET combined with TOPSIS and SPOTIS, which could be the basis for a decision support system (DSS) in the problem of selecting solar panels. Solar energy is one of the most promising and environmentally friendly energy sources because of the enormous potential of directly converting available solar radiation everywhere into electricity. Furthermore, ever-lower prices for photovoltaic systems make solar electricity more competitive with power from conventional energy sources, increasing interest in solar panels among companies and households. This fact generates the need for a user-friendly, objective, fully automated DSS to support the multi-criteria selection of solar panels. Both MCDM methods chosen for this purpose are rank-reversal-free and precise. First, the objective entropy weighting method was applied for determining criteria weights. Final rankings were compared by two ranking correlation coefficients: symmetrical rw and asymmetrical WS. Then the sensitivity analysis providing local weights of alternatives for decision criteria was performed. The obtained results prove the adequacy and practical usefulness of the presented approach in solving the problem of solar panels selection.
The aim of this paper is to present the use of an innovative approach based on MCDM methods as the main component of a consumer Decision Support System (DSS) by recommending the most suitable products among a given set of alternatives. This system provides a reliable recommendation to the consumer in the form of a compromise ranking constructed from the five MCDM methods: the hybrid approach TOPSIS-COMET, COCOSO, EDAS, MAIRCA, and MABAC. Each of the methods used contributes significantly to the final compromise ranking built with the Copeland strategy. Chosen MCDM methods were combined with the objective CRITIC weighting method, and their performance was presented on the illustrative example of choosing the most suitable mobile phone. A sensitivity analysis involving the rw and WS correlation coefficients was performed to determine the match between the compromise ranking of the candidates and the rankings provided by each MCDM method. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that all investigated compromise candidate rankings show high convergence with the rankings provided by the particular MCDM methods. Thus, the performed study proved that the proposed approach shows high potential to be successfully used as a central component of DSS for recommending the most suitable product. Such DSS could be a universal and future-proof solution for e-commerce sites and websites, providing advanced product comparison capabilities in delivering a recommendation to the user as a final ranking of alternatives.
Decision support systems (DSS) are currently developing rapidly and are increasingly used in various fields. More often, those systems are inseparable from information-based systems and computer systems. Therefore, from a methodical point of view, the algorithms implemented in the DSS play a critical role. In this aspect, multi-criteria decision support (MCDA) methods are widely used. As research progresses, many MCDA methods and algorithms for the objective identification of the significance of individual criteria of the MCDA models were developed. In this paper, an analysis of available objective methods for criteria weighting is presented. Additionally, the authors presented the implementation of the system that provides easy and accessible weight calculations for any decision matrix with the possibility of comparing results of different weighting methods. The results of weighting methods were compared using carefully selected similarity coefficients to emphasise the correlation of the resulting weights. The performed research shows that every method should provide distinctive weights considering input data, emphasising the importance of choosing the correct method for a given multi-criteria decision support model and DSS.
The purpose of this paper is to propose a new Pythagorean fuzzy entropy for Pythagorean fuzzy sets, which is a continuation of the Pythagorean fuzzy entropy of intuitionistic sets. The Pythagorean fuzzy set continues the intuitionistic fuzzy set with the additional advantage that it is well equipped to overcome its imperfections. Its entropy determines the quantity of information in the Pythagorean fuzzy set. Thus, the proposed entropy provides a new flexible tool that is particularly useful in complex multi-criteria problems where uncertain data and inaccurate information are considered. The performance of the introduced method is illustrated in a real-life case study, including a multi-criteria company selection problem. In this example, we provide a numerical illustration to distinguish the entropy measure proposed from some existing entropies used for Pythagorean fuzzy sets and intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Statistical illustrations show that the proposed entropy measures are reliable for demonstrating the degree of fuzziness of both Pythagorean fuzzy set (PFS) and intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFS). In addition, a multi-criteria decision-making method complex proportional assessment (COPRAS) was also proposed with weights calculated based on the proposed new entropy measure. Finally, to validate the reliability of the results obtained using the proposed entropy, a comparative analysis was performed with a set of carefully selected reference methods containing other generally used entropy measurement methods. The illustrated numerical example proves that the calculation results of the proposed new method are similar to those of several other up-to-date methods.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.