Abstract
After four decades, numerous TOPSIS variants have been introduced. This chapter includes nine sections, one for each of the individual variants, as: normalization processes, weights on criteria, distance functions, selection of PIS/NIS, relative closeness formula, ordinal input, weights on separation measures, dependent criteria, and incremental analysis. All of them are reviewed with illustrative examples. These contents could provide deep insights into the TOPSIS algorithm.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Acuña, C., Liern, V., Pérez-, B.: Normalization in TOPSIS-based approaches with data of different nature: application to the ranking of mathematical videos. Ann. Oper. Res. 296, 541–569 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-018-2945-5
Alfares, H.K., Duffuaa, S.O.: Assigning cardinal weights in multi-criteria decision making based on ordinal ranking. J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal. 15, 125–133 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.420
Antuchevičiene, J., Zavadskas, E.K., Zakarevičius, A.: Multiple criteria construction management decisions considering relations between criteria. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 16, 109–125 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2010.07
Arcidiacono, S.G., Corrente, S., Greco, S.: Robust stochastic sorting with interacting criteria hierarchically structured. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 292, 735–754 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.11.024
Barron, F.H., Barrett, B.E.: Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Manage. Sci. 42, 1515–1523 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.11.1515
Baykasoğlu, A., Kaplanoğlu, V., Durmuşoğlu, Z.D.U., Şahin, D.: Integrating fuzzy DEMATEL and fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS methods for truck selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 40, 899–907 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.046
Bernhard, R.H., Canada, J.R.: Some problems in using benefit/cost ratios with the analytic hierarchy process. Eng. Econ. 36, 56–65 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1080/00137919008903031
Blank, L., Tarquin, A.: Engineering Economy, 8th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2017). ISBN: 9780073523439
Cables, E., Lamata, M.T., Verdegay, J.L.: RIM-reference ideal method in multicriteria decision making. Inf. Sci. 337–338, 1–10 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.12.011
Chang, C.H., Lin, J.J., Lin, J.H., Chiang, M.C.: Domestic open-end equity mutual fund performance evaluation using extended TOPSIS method with different distance approaches. Expert Syst. Appl. 37, 4642–4649 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.044
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Ferguson, R.O.: Optimal estimation of executive compensation by linear programming. Manage. Sci. 1, 138–151 (1955)
Chen, C.T.: Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 114, 1–9 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00377-1
Chen, P.: Effects of normalization on the entropy-based TOPSIS method. Expert Syst. Appl. 136, 33–41 (2019a). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.035
Chen, P.: A novel coordinated TOPSIS based on coefficient of variation. Mathematics 7(614), 1–17 (2019b). https://doi.org/10.3390/math7070614
Chen, S.J., Hwang, C.L.: Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer, Berlin (1992). ISBN: 9783540549987
Chen, Y., Kilgour, D.M., Hipel, K.W.: An extreme-distance approach to multiple criteria ranking. Math. Comput. Model. 53, 646–658 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.10.001
Choo, E.W., Schoner, B., Wedley, W.C.: Interpretation of criteria weights in multicriteria decision making. Comput. Ind. Eng. 37, 527–541 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(00)00019-X
Choquet, G.: Theory of capacities. Annales De L’institut Fourier 5, 131–295 (1953). https://doi.org/10.5802/aif.53
Chu, A.T.W., Kalaba, R.E., Spingarn, K.A.: A comparison of two methods for determining the weights of belonging to fuzzy sets. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 27, 531–538 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00933438
Cook, R.L., Stewart, T.R.: A comparison of seven methods for obtaining subjective descriptions of judgmental policy. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 13, 31–45 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(75)90004-5
Cook, W.D., Kress, M.: Deriving weights from pairwise comparison ratio matrices: an axiomatic approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 37, 355–362 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(88)90198-1
Çelen, A.: Comparative analysis of normalization procedures in TOPSIS method: With an application to Turkish deposit banking market. Informatica 25, 185–208 (2014). https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2014.10
Dawes, R.M., Corrigan, B.: Linear models in decision making. Psychol. Bull. 81, 91–106 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037613
Diakoulaki, D., Martotas, G., Papayannakis, L.: Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: the CRITIC method. Comput. Oper. Res. 22, 763–770 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H
Doukas, H., Karakosta, C., Psarras, J.: Computing with words to assess the sustainability of renewable energy options. Expert Syst. Appl. 37, 5491–5497 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.061
Eckenrode, R.T.: Weighting multiple criteria. Manage. Sci. 12, 180–192 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.12.3.180
Fan, Z.P., Zhang, X., Chen, F.D., Liu, Y.: Multiple attribute decision making considering aspiration-levels: a method based on prospect theory. Comput. Ind. Eng. 65, 341–350 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2013.02.013
García, F., Guijarro, F., Moya, I.: A goal programming approach to estimating performance weights for ranking firms. Comput. Oper. Res. 37, 1597–1609 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2009.11.018
García-Cascales, M.S., Lamata, M.T.: On rank reversal and TOPSIS method. Math. Comput. Model. 56, 123–132 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2011.12.022
Gomes, L.F.A.M., Lima, M.M.P.P.: TODIM: basics and application to multi-criteria ranking of projects with environmental impacts. Found. Comput. Decis. Sci. 16, 113–127 (1991)
Gomes, L.F.A.M., Lima, M.M.P.P.: From modelling individual preferences to multi-criteria ranking of discrete alternatives: a look at prospect theory and the additive difference model. Found. Comput. Decis. Sci. 17, 171–184 (1992)
Gomes, L.F.A.M., Machado, M.A.S., Rangel, L.A.D.: Behavioral multi-criteria decision analysis: the TODIM method with criteria interactions. Ann. Oper. Res. 211, 531–548 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-013-1345-0
Gölcüka, İ, Baykasoğlua, A.: Analysis of DEMATEL approaches for criteria interaction handling within ANP. Expert Syst. Appl. 46, 346–366 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.10.041
Gürbüz, T., Alptekin, S.E., Alptekin, G.I.: A hybrid MCDM methodology for ERP selection problem with interacting criteria. Decis. Support Syst. 54, 206–214 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.006
Hamming, R.W.: Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 29, 147–160 (1950). https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305
Hellinger, E.: Neue begründung der theorie quadratischer formen von unendlichvielen veränderlichen. Journal Für Die Reine Und Angewandte Mathematik (in German) 136, 210–271 (1909). https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.1909.136.210
Hillier, F., Lieberman, G.: Introduction to Operations Research, 10th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2014). ISBN: 9781259162985
Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: A State-of-the-Art Survey. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1981). ISBN: 9783540105589
Izadikhah, M.: Using the Hamming distance to extend TOPSIS in a fuzzy environment. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 231, 200–207 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2009.02.102
Jahan, A., Edwards, K.L.: Weighting of dependent and target-based criteria for optimal decision-making in materials selection process: biomedical applications. Mater. Des. 49, 1000–1008 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.02.064
Jahan, A., Edwards, K.L.: A state-of-the-art survey on the influence of normalization techniques in ranking: improving the materials selection process in engineering design. Mater. Des. 65, 335–342 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2014.09.022
Jahan, A., Mustapha, F., Sapuan, S.M., Ismail, M.Y., Bahraminasab, M.: A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 58, 411–420 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3366-7
Jahanshahloo, G.R., Lotfi, F.H., Davoodi, A.R.: Extension of TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data: interval efficiency. Math. Comput. Model. 49, 1137–1142 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2008.07.009
Jee, D.H., Kang, K.J.: A method for optimal material selection aided with decision making theory. Mater. Des. 21, 199–206 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3069(99)00066-7
Jones, D.F., Mardle, S.J.: A distance-metric methodology for the derivation of weights from a pairwise comparison matrix. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 55, 869–875 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601745
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47, 263–292 (1979). https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
Kaliszewski, I.: Rankings Revisited. Decyzje 2018(30), 75–84 (2018). https://doi.org/10.7206/DEC.1733-0092.115
Kaliszewski, I., Podkopaev, D.: Simple additive weighting—a metamodel for multiple criteria decision analysis methods. Expert Syst. Appl. 54, 155–161 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.01.042
Kirkwood, C.W., Corner, J.L.: The effectiveness of partial information about attribute weights for ranking alternatives in multiattribute decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 54, 456–476 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1993.1019
Kong, F.: Rank reversal and rank preservation in TOPSIS. Adv. Mater. Res. 204–210, 36–41 (2011). https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.204-210.36
Kovács, P., Petres, T., Tóth, L.: A new measure of multicollinearity in linear regression models. Int. Stat. Rev. 73, 405–412 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2005.tb00156.x
Kuo, T.: A modified TOPSIS with a different ranking index. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 260, 152–160 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.11.052
Lai, Y.J.: TOPSIS for MODM. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 76, 486–500 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90282-8
Larichev, O.I.: Cognitive validity in design of decision-aiding techniques. J. Multi-Criteria Decis. Anal. 1, 127–138 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.4020010303
Lee, Y.S., Shih, H.S.: Incremental analysis for generalized TODIM. CEJOR 24, 901–922 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0427-2
Li, D.F.: Relative ratio method for multiple attribute decision making problems. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 8, 289–311 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622009003405
Liu, D., Qi, X., Fu, Q., Li, M., Zhu, W., Zhang, L., Faiz, M.A., Khan, M.I., Li, T., Cui, S.: A resilience evaluation method for a combined regional agricultural water and soil resource system based on weighted Mahalanobis distance and a Gray-TOPSIS model. J. Clean. Prod. 229, 667–679 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.406
Lourenzutti, R., Krohling, R.A.: The Hellinger distance in multicriteria decision making: an illustration to the TOPSIS and TODIM methods. Expert Syst. Appl. 41, 4414–4421 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.01.015
Lourenzutti, R., Krohling, R.A., Reformat, M.Z.: Choquet based TOPSIS and TODIM for dynamic and heterogeneous decision making with criteria interaction. Inf. Sci. 408, 41–69 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2017.04.037
Ma, J., Fan, Z.P., Huang, L.H.: A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 112, 397–404 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00141-6
Mahalanobis, P.C.: On the generalised distance in statistics. Proc. Natl. Inst. Sci. India 2, 49–55 (1936). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13171-019-00164-5(Reprinted)
Meng, F., Chen, S.M., Tang, J.: Multicriteria decision making based on bi-direction Choquet integrals. Inf. Sci. 555, 339–356 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2020.10.055
Mufazzal, S., Muzakkir, S.M.: A new MCDM method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Comput. Ind. Eng. 119, 427–438 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.045
Newnan, D.G., Lavelle, J.P., Eschenbach, T.G.: Engineering Economic Analysis, 12th edn. Oxford University Press, New York (2013). ISBN: 9780199339273
Nijkamp, P.: Stochastic quantitative and qualitative multicriiteria analysis for environmental design. Reg. Sci. 39, 175–199 (1977a). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5597.1977.tb01006.x
Nijkamp, P. A. van Delft: Multicriteria Analysis and Regional Decision Making. Springer, Leiden (1977b). ISBN: 9789020706895
Olson, D.L.: Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models. Math. Comput. Model. 40, 721–727 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2004.10.003
Olson, D.L., Dorai, V.K.: Implementation of the centroid method of Solymosi and Dombi. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 60, 117–129 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(92)90339-B
Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H.: Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 156, 445–455 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
Pavličić, D.M.: Normalisation effects the results of MADM methods. Yugoslav J. Oper. Res. 11, 251–265 (2001)
Peldschus, F.: Recent findings from numerical analysis in multi-criteria decision making. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 24, 1695–1717 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2017.1356761
Ramík, J., Perzina, R.: A method for solving fuzzy multicriteria decision problems with dependent criteria. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Making 9, 123–141 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10700-010-9078-x
Ren, L., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Sun, Z.: Comparative analysis of a novel M-TOPSIS method and TOPSIS. Appl. Math. Res. eXpress Article ID abm005, 1–10 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/amrx/abm005
Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009
Riabacke, M., Danielson, M., Ekenberg, L.: State-of-the-art prescriptive criteria weight elicitation. Adv. Decis. Sci. 2012, Article ID 276584, 1–24 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/276584
Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980). ISBN: 9780070543713
Saaty, T.L.: Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1996). ISBN: 9780962031793
Saaty, T.L.: Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision Making with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (2005). ISBN: 9781888603064
Saaty, T.L., Takizawa, M.: Dependence and independence—from linear hierarchies to nonlinear networks. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 26, 229–237 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90184-0
Schmitt, N.: Comparison of subjective and objective weighting strategies in changing task situations. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 21, 171–188 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(78)90048-X
Schoemaker, P.J.H., Waid, C.C.: An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models. Manage. Sci. 28, 182–195 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.28.2.182
Sheikh, V., Kornejady, A., Ownegh, M.: Application of the coupled TOPSIS–Mahalanobis distance for multi-hazard-based management of the target districts of the Golestan Province. Iran. Nat. Haz. 96, 1335–1365 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03617-0
Shih, H.S.: An incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 186, 720–734 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2007.02.012
Shih, H.S.: A mixed-data evaluation in group TOPSIS with differentiated decision power. Group Decis. Negot. 25, 537–565 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-015-9451-9
Shih, H.S., Shyur, H.J., Lee, E.S.: An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Math. Comput. Model. 45, 801–813 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2006.03.023
Shyur, H.-J., Shih, H.-S.: A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection. Math. Comput. Model. 44, 749–761 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2005.04.018
Si, S.L., You, X.Y., Liu, H.C., Zhang, P.: DEMATEL technique: a systematic review of the state-of-the-art literature on methodologies and applications. Math. Probl. Eng. 2018(3696457), 1–33 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3696457
Steuer, R.E.: Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application. John Wiley, New York (1986). ISBN: 9780471888468
Stillwell, W.G., Seaver, D.A., Edwards, W.: A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 28, 62–77 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(81)90015-5
Triantaphyllou, E.: Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000). ISBN: 9781475731576
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertain. 5, 297–323 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574
Tzeng, G.-H., Chen, T.-Y., Wang, J.-C.: A weight-assessing method with habitual domains. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 110, 342–367 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00246-4
Vega, A., Aguarónb, J., García-Alcaraza, J., Moreno-Jiménez, J.M.: Notes on Dependent Attributes in TOPSIS. Procedia Computer Science 31, 308–317 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.05.273
Voogd, H.: Multicriteria Evaluation for Urban and Regional Planning. Pion, London (1983). ISBN: 9780850861068
Wang, Z.X., Li, D.D., Zheng, H.H.: The external performance appraisal of Chinaenergy regulation: an empirical study using a TOPSIS method based on entropy weight and Mahalanobis distance. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15(236), 1–18 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15020236
Weber, M., Borcherding, K.: Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 67, 1–12 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(93)90318-H
Wiecek, M.M., Ehrgott, M., Engau, A.: Countinuous multiobjective programming. In: Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Figueira, J.R. (Eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, pp. 739–815, Chap. 18, 2nd Edn. Springer, New York (2016). ISBN 9781493930937
Xu, Y., Zhang, L., Yeh, C.H., Liu, Y.: Evaluating WEEE recycling innovation strategies with interacting sustainability-related criteria. J. Clean. Prod. 190, 618–629 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.078
Yager, R.R.: On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 18, 183–190 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/10.1109/21.87068
Yager, R.R.: Quantifier guided aggregation using OWA operators. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 11, 49–73 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-111X(199601)11:1%3c49::AID-INT3%3e3.0.CO;2-Z
Yang, J.L., Chiu, H.N., Tzeng, G.H., Yeh, R.H.: Vendor selection by integrated fuzzy MCDM techniques with independent and interdependent relationships. Inf. Sci. 178, 4166–4183 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.06.003
Yang, K.L., Chu, P., Chouhuang, W.T.: Note on incremental benefit/cost ratios in analytic hierarchy process. Math. Comput. Modell. 39, 279–286 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-7177(04)90011-8
Yin, L., Shyur, H.J.: A robust group multiple attributes decision-making method based on risk preference of the decision makers. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. 15, 33–46 (2018). https://doi.org/10.6703/IJASE.201802_15(1).033
Yoon, K.: A reconciliation among discrete compromise solutions. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 38, 277–286 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.1987.44
Yoon, K.P., Hwang, C.-L.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA (1995). ISBN: 9780803954861
Yoon, K.P., Kim, W.K.: The behavioral TOPSIS. Expert Syst. Appl. 89, 266–272 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.07.045
Yu, L., Yang, W., Duan, Y., Long, X.: A study on the application of coordinated TOPSIS in evaluation of robotics academic journals. Math. Probl. Eng. 2018(5456064), 1–7 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5456064
Yu, P.L.: A class of solutions for group decision problems. Manage. Sci. 19, 936–946 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.19.8.936
Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., Dublish, S.: Multi-attribute decision making: a simulation comparison of selection methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 107, 507–529 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00147-1
Zardari, N.H., Ahmed, K., Shirazi, S.M., Yusop, Z.B.: Weighting Methods and their Effects on Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model Outcomes in Water Resources Management. Springer, Cham (2015). ISBN: 9783319125855
Zavadskas, E.K., Turskis, Z.: A new logarithmic normalization method in games theory. Informatica 19, 303–314 (2008). https://doi.org/10.15388/Informatica.2008.215
Zeleny, M.: A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Comput. Oper. Res. 1, 479–496 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(74)90064-1
Zeng, Q.L., Li, D.D., Yang, Y.B.: VIKOR method with enhanced accuracy for multiple criteria decision making in healthcare management. J. Med. Syst. 37(9908), 1–9 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-012-9908-1
Zyoud, S.H., Fuchs-, D.: A bibliometric-based survey on AHP and TOPSIS techniques. Expert Syst. Appl. 78, 158–181 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.016
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shih, HS. (2022). TOPSIS Variants. In: TOPSIS and its Extensions: A Distance-Based MCDM Approach. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, vol 447. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09577-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09577-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-09576-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-09577-1
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)