2020
DOI: 10.31181/rme200101034c
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sustainable supplier selection using combined FUCOM – Rough SAW model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
72
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 139 publications
(74 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
72
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on the settings defined, the final nonlinear model for determining the optimal fuzzy values of the weight coefficients of the evaluation criteria can be set 12 ( , ,..., ) T n w w w .…”
Section: Conditionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Based on the settings defined, the final nonlinear model for determining the optimal fuzzy values of the weight coefficients of the evaluation criteria can be set 12 ( , ,..., ) T n w w w .…”
Section: Conditionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, unlike other subjective models, the FUCOM has shown minor deviations in the obtained values of the weights of criteria from the optimum values [9]. Moreover, the methodological procedure of the FUCOM eliminates the problem of redundancy of pairwise comparisons of criteria, which is present in some subjective models for determining the weights of criteria [10,11,12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The distribution of the weight coefficients of the membership functions should reflect reality as much as possible. In this particular case, w (xi) (j) was determined by interviewing experts and applying the FUCOM (Full Consistency Method) method (Pamučar et al, 2018), (Bozanic et al, 2019), (Fazlollahtabar et al, 2019), (Puška et al, 2019), (Erceg & Mularifović, 2019), (Durmić, 2019), (Nenadić, 2019), (Žižović & Pamucar, 2019), (Bozanic et al, 2020), (Durmić et al, 2020). Three experts were interviewed, and the results of the calculation of the weight coefficients are shown in Table 5.…”
Section: Most Often W (Xi)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simanaviciene and Ustinovichius 40 , suggested verification of the obtained solution by carrying out a sensitivity analysis of changes in the criteria weights. Also, some authors [45][46][47][48] stressed the need to conduct a sensitivity analysis in order to validate the MCDM results. Taking these recommendations into account, we have performed the sensitivity analysis in two stages.…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%