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.
Education is an essential component for nations preparing to take advantage of the opportunities and confront the challenges of the 21st century. Universities, colleges, and research centers must work effectively and efficiently to achieve maximum results. In order to provide a comparable and verifiable evaluation of such institutions’ efforts, administrators need to adopt measurement tools such as those offered by multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). The use of MCDM to solve complex real-world problems in the educational sector has dramatically increased in the past decade. This paper ranked the Engineering departments in a public university from 2019 to 2021 using combined MCDM methods between Analytical Hierarchy Analysis (AHP) and Ranking Alternatives by Perimeter Similarity (RAPS). The AHP technique assisted in the weighting for each evaluation criterion covered in this study. The RAPS technique assisted in ranking the Engineering departments using weights derived from the AHP technique. For the first time, the use of RAPS in the educational sector is presented in this paper. The findings revealed some of the departments under investigation’s vulnerabilities, indicating that they require assistance from the institution’s administration. Moreover, the results demonstrate that combining the AHP and RAPS techniques to evaluate and rank university departments is a successful method.
Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) are the foundation of United States recycling programs. MRFs collect recyclable materials from end users for export to be processed abroad or to sell to mills for further refinement and reuse. The most popular type of recycling collection in the United States is Single-Stream Recycling (SSR). Numerous studies have validated the program’s popularity and consumer acceptance. In contrast to other recycling plans, SSR’s favored status rests on its minimal consumer burden, which requires only a cursory identification of potentially recyclable materials for placement in a single container separate from other waste. Researchers have also found that collecting SSR materials requires less staff and cheaper collection vehicles. While SSR generates greater end-user acceptance than other recycling collection programs, SSR differs markedly in terms of higher inbound contamination rates and quality of recovered recycling materials. Single-stream collection increases cross-contamination through mixing recyclable and non-recyclable materials in a single container. High contamination rates lower the quality of incoming recyclables and increase overall MRF operating costs due to additional sorting time and related staffing costs. This paper aims to analyze the causes of high inbound contamination in SSR using Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) techniques to support deeper analysis of the relative importance of three factors that scholars have identified as being related to SSR inbound contamination of MRFs. Based on the results obtained, the absence of awareness campaigns is one of the crucial factors increasing inbound contamination due to the inefficiency of the SSR system in separating unrecyclable from recyclable materials; therefore, the sorting equipment at MRFs requires further improvement. Focused analysis of causal inbound contamination factors may assist in furthering efforts to reduce SSR contamination.
In the past decade, the use of multiple-criteria decision analysis technology has dramatically increased in solving complex real-world problems in solid waste management. Likewise, many municipalities have paid attention to finding feasible solutions for disposal and recycling of solid waste due to the increase in waste generation rates worldwide. Therefore, policy-makers must determine which recycling program to be implemented among various recycling program options. In this paper, a new approach to select a recycling program for recovered paper and pulp recyclables was proposed using analytic hierarchy process–Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (AHP-TOPSIS) techniques. A set of essential parameters of the decision-making system were identified, and a numerical case to illustrate the procedure was conducted. Our findings show very encouraging results to use a combined model between AHP and TOPSIS to select a suitable recycling program for different recovered recyclable materials.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.