scholarly journals The Multi-Aspect Criterion in the PMADM Outline and Its Possible Application to Sustainability Assessment

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani ◽  
Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas ◽  
Payam Khazaelpour ◽  
Fausto Cavallaro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Initial Phase ◽  
Sustainability Assessment ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The Past ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
The Future

Over the past few centuries, the process of decision-making has become more complicated in different respects. Since the initial phase of Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) around fifty years ago, Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) has continued developing over the years as a sub-concept of MCDM. Noticeably, the importance of the decision-making process is increasingly expanding to such an extent that it necessarily blends into the undeniable processes of MADM actual models. Novel methods with different perspectives have been introduced considering the dynamic MADM concepts of time and future in classical frameworks; however, they do not overcome challenges in practice. Recently, Prospective MADM (PMADM) as a specific approach has presented future-oriented models using already known approaches of MCDM, and it has innovative items which show barriers of classic model of MADM. However, PMADM practically needs more conceptual bases to illustrate and plan the future of real decision-making problems. The Multi-Aspect Criterion is a new concept in mapping the future of the PMADM outline. In this regard, two examples of sustainability will be analyzed, and different requirements and aspects associated with PMADM will be discussed in this study. This new approach can support the PMADM outline in more detail and deal with a decision-making structure that can be considered as novel to industry experts.

scholarly journals AN INTRODUCTION TO PROSPECTIVE MULTIPLE ATTRIBUTE DECISION MAKING (PMADM)

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarfaraz HASHEMKHANI ZOLFANI ◽  
Reza MAKNOON ◽  
Edmundas Kazimieras ZAVADSKAS
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Future Research ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
The Future ◽  
Science Community ◽  
Future Topics

In recent years futures science has received a great deal of attention and has gained worldwide credibility in the science community as the science of tomorrows. The countless applications of futures studies in various fields have been a major breakthrough for mankind. Undoubtedly, decision making is one of the most significant aspects of shaping the future and an integral part of any credible future research. Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) in general and Multiple Attribute Decision Making in particular (MADM), are among the most remarkable subparts of the decision making process. The most recent model developed using the MADM method is the Dynamic MADM. The model does not specifically concentrate on the future actions and approaches and remains to be fully explored. This research presents a new concept and a new approach in the MADM field which is called the Prospective Multiple Attribute Decision Making (PMADM). The PMADM model can very well cover the DMADM concept but instead chooses to focus on future topics. The study also introduces two new approaches. The first research aims to elaborate the basis of this model and then evolves to deal with the future limiters as they potentially pop up and change the course of future actions. The new model based on future limiters is separated and categorized into two sections; one of which is looked upon without the probabilities rate and the other one with the probabilities rate. This approach is deemed priceless due to its major applicability in the ranking of the MADM methods such as: TOPSIS, VIKOR, COPRAS, ARAS, WASPAS and etc. Finally, a case study with the various applications of PMADM model in WASPAS methodology is put forth and illustrated.

scholarly journals MADM AND FUTURES STUDIES; A NECESSITY

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani ◽  
Reza Maknoon ◽  
Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Criteria ◽  
Futures Studies ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
The Past ◽  
Stable Environment ◽  
Unit Model ◽  
Multiple Attribute

Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) has been developing in different methods, perspectives and frameworks since introducing step. Futures Studies as a specialized framework and methodology has introduced newer and has been always in developing phase too. MADM as a part of Multiple Criteria Decision Making is known as multi-disciplinary approach, framework and methodology. Nowadays, Futures Studies is also known as multi-disciplinary approach too. Basically, MADM is structured for a stable environment while most decisions need to be made, dynamically. Time is so much important especially in the new century in comparison with the past. Decisions making about future are usually so complicated and MADM can be helpful in that process. Importance of making future based decisions is undeniable in trying to answer to decision needs. This research will present a comprehensive review on the literature of MADM and new orientations in considering future in MADM models and necessity of them will be checked also carefully. Eventually, importance of seeing both MADM and Futures Studies together as a unit model will be discussed in this study.

scholarly journals MULTIPLE ATTRIBUTE DECISION MAKING (MADM) BASED SCENARIOS

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarfaraz HASHEMKHANI ZOLFANI ◽  
Reza MAKNOON
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
New Approach ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Future ◽  
Future Topics

Decision making takes into account a myriad of factors about the future topics, which often prove challenging and quite complicated. Multiple Attribute Decision-Making (MADM) methods still have not become powerful enough to help decision makers to adopt the best solutions regarding future issues. Different scenarios are suitable for developing an appropriate outlook toward different probable futures. Scenarios are not inherently quantitative, but recently different integrated quantitative methods have been incorporated with the processes in various studies. Previously, different types of scenario-based MADM methods have been presented in different studies, but they just considered each case separately. In those studies, MADM methods were only applied to evaluate the situation in scenario-based MADM. This research concentrates on another paradigm in applying scenarios to upcoming events, MADM methods in the new area are explored, and the concept, which is called MADM based scenarios, is presented. In different situations and scenarios, different MADM models will happen. New concepts about most useful criterion and applicable alternatives are introduced in this new approach for decision-making about the future. In addition, a general framework is proposed for applying MADM-based scenarios for unpredictable scenarios and situations, which can be almost controlled future in practice.

scholarly journals Railway communication system; Reliability; Mean time to failure; Markov process; Sensitivity

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani ◽  
◽  
Ali Ebadi Torkayesh ◽  
Ramin Bazrafshan ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Time To Failure ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
Rank One ◽  
Time Requirements ◽  
Vision 2030 ◽  
Rank 2 ◽  
Mean Time

Policy-making is an undeniable decision-making process in every company where different kinds of decisions are taken based on different goals and preferences in each vision. “Prospective Multiple Attribute Decision Making (PMADM)” is one of the well-known decision-making frameworks that have been used as a flexible decision-making tool for developing policies and making future decisions over different periods. This study presents a multi attribute problem with three different visions where a decision-making process is required for each vision in order to prioritize the potential set of alternatives. Evaluation Based on the Distance from the Average Solution (EDAS) is used as a MADM model to show the applicability and feasibility of the PMADM framework. A vision-based weighting system (ViWeS) prepares a new opportunity to take proper decisions in different visions and time requirements. This research is analyzed three-time vision (Current, 2025, and 2030) and showed by changing the time, the rank of the alternatives also is changed. In numerical example is indicated in the current vision, Alternative 5 gets rank one and alternative six get rank 2, for 2025 vision, the rank one and two don’t change, and in vision 2030, the rank of one does not change, but the rank of second change from Alternative 6 to 3.

scholarly journals Extended TODIM Method for MADM Problem under Trapezoidal Intuitionistic Fuzzy Environment

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiping Ren ◽  
Manfeng Liu ◽  
Hui Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Distance Measure ◽  
Multiple Attribute Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Intuitionistic Fuzzy Numbers ◽  
Intuitionistic Fuzzy ◽  
Psychological Behavior ◽  
Multiple Attribute ◽  
Todim Method

In actual decision making process, the final decision result is often affected by decision maker’s psychological behavior, however, for the multiple attribute decision making (MADM) problem in which attributes values are expressed with trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (TIFNs), there is few literature considering the decision maker's behavior factors in decision making process. For this case, this paper first proposes a new distance measure of TIFNs and a new ranking method which considers decision maker’s attitude behavior, and then develops an extended TODIM decision making method. Finally an example is given to illustrate the validity and practicability of the proposed method.

scholarly journals Examples of Mental Mistakes Made by Systems Engineers While Creating Tradeoff Studies

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 22 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bohlman ◽  
A. Terry Bahill
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
System Design ◽  
Systems Engineering ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Problem Statement ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Future ◽  
Design Documents

Problem statement: Humans often make poor decisions. To help them make better decisions, engineers are taught to create tradeoff studies. However, these engineers are usually unaware of mental mistakes that they make while creating their tradeoff studies. We need to increase awareness of a dozen specific mental mistakes that engineers commonly make while creating tradeoff studies. Aims of the research: To prove that engineers actually do make mental mistakes while creating tradeoff studies. To identify which mental mistakes can be detected in tradeoff study documentation. Methodology: Over the past two decades, teams of students and practicing engineers in Bahill’s Systems Engineering courses wrote the system design documents for an assigned system. On average, each of these document sets took 100 man-hours to create and comprised 75 pages. We used 110 of these projects, two dozen government contractor tradeoff studies and three publicly accessible tradeoff studies. We scoured these document sets looking for examples of 28 specific mental mistakes that might affect a tradeoff study. We found instances of a dozen of these mental mistakes. Results: Often evidence of some of these mistakes cannot be found in the final documentation. To find evidence for such mistakes, the experimenters would have had to be a part of the data collection and decision making process. That is why, in this paper, we present only 12 of the original 28 mental mistakes. We found hundreds of examples of such mistakes. We provide suggestions to help people avoid making these mental mistakes while doing tradeoff studies. Conclusions: This paper shows evidence of a dozen common mental mistakes that are continually being repeated by engineers while creating tradeoff studies. When engineers are taught about these mistakes, they can minimize their occurrence in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document