Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive mathematical model for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, a predictive mathematical model is proposed to identify the best alternatives from the given set of alternatives characterized by multiple criteria. An objective function is developed to find the ranking index of the alternatives. A new Comprehensive-Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (C-TOPSIS) method is proposed which combines the comprehensive weights of the criteria with TOPSIS method. The proposed predictive mathematical model generates a ranking of the alternatives. An experimental study has been carried out by taking agricultural data set of rice paddy crop to demonstrate and validate the developed model. The results show significant correlation between the ranks obtained by the proposed model and the ranks obtained from the average yield per hectare. Also the results of the proposed method outperform the results of the other ranking methods, namely VIKOR and ELECTRE, particularly in the real world example. Thus, the developed predictive mathematical model seems to provide better results for the given alternatives and can also be used for other decision-making problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Velasquez M, Hester PT (2013) An analysis of multi-criteria decision making methods. Int J Oper Res 10(2):56–66

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Roszkowska E (2011) Multi-criteria decision making models by applying the TOPSIS method to crisp and interval data. Mult Criteria Decis Mak Univ Econ Katow 6:200–230

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zardari NH, Ahmed K, Shirazi SM, Yusop ZB (2015) Literature review. In: Weighting methods and their effects on multi-criteria decision making model outcomes in water resources management. Springerbriefs in water science and technology. Springer, Cham

  4. Bojorquez-Tapia LA, Diaz-Mondragon S, Ezcurra E (2001) GIS-based approach for participatory decision making and land suitability assessment. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 15(2):129–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mustafa AA, Singh M, Sahoo RN, Ahmed N, Khanna M, Sarangi A, Mishra AK (2011) Land suitability analysis for different crops: a multi criteria decision making approach using remote sensing and GIS. Researcher 3(12):1–24

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wu HY, Chen JK, Chen IS, Zhuo HH (2012) Ranking universities based on performance evaluation by a hybrid MCDM model. Measurement 45(5):856–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ma J, Fan ZP, Huang LH (1999) A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights. Eur J Oper Res 112(2):397–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shemshadi A, Shirazi H, Toreihi M, Tarokh MJ (2011) A fuzzy VIKOR method for supplier selection based on entropy measure for objective weighting. Expert Syst Appl 38(10):12160–12167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rong Z, Sifeng L, Bin L (2009) A method for weight assignment by dominance-based rough sets approach. In: Control and decision conference, 2009 (CCDC’09) Chinese. IEEE, pp 6060–6065

  10. Deepa N, Ganesan K (2016) Multi-class classification using hybrid soft decision model for agriculture crop selection. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-016-2749-y

  11. Deepa N, Ganesan K (2017) Decision-making tool for crop selection for agriculture development. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-017-3154-x

  12. Huang MJ, Zhang YB, Luo JH, Nie H (2015) Evaluation of economics journals based on reduction algorithm of rough set and grey correlation. J Manag Sustain 5(1):140

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mahalakshmi P, Ganesan K, Venkatasubramanian V (2012) DMTIOLA: decision making tool for identification of optimal location for aquaculture farming development. Aquacult Int 20(5):911–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Roszkowska Ewa (2013) Rank ordering criteria weighting methods: a comparative overview. Optim Stud Ekon Nr 5(65):14–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hongjiu L, Yanrong H (2015) An evaluating method with combined assigning-weight based on maximizing variance. Sci Program 2015:3

    Google Scholar 

  16. Xuan L, Jinwei L, Mengxin X, Guowei H, Changming L (2015) Application of combination weighting grey correlation model in the optimization for deep foundation pit supporting scheme. Electron J Geotech Eng 20:6915–6926

    Google Scholar 

  17. Liu D, Zhao X (2013) Method and application for dynamic comprehensive evaluation with subjective and objective information. PLoS ONE 8(12):e83323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Özcan T, Çelebi N, Esnaf Ş (2011) Comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision making methodologies and implementation of a warehouse location selection problem. Expert Syst Appl 38(8):9773–9779

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hwang CL, Yoon K (2012) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey, vol 186. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Stagnitti F, Austin C (1998) DESTA: a software tool for selecting sites for new aquaculture facilities. Aquacult Eng 18(2):79–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bansiya J, Davis CG (2002) A hierarchical model for object-oriented design quality assessment. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 28(1):4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zar JH (1972) Significance testing of the Spearman rank correlation coefficient. J Am Stat Assoc 67(339):578–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work forms part of the R and D activities of TIFAC-CORE in Automotive Infotronics located at VIT University, Vellore. The authors would like to thank DST, Government of India, for providing necessary hardware and software support for completing this work successfully.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Technology and Engineering, VIT University, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

    N. Deepa

  2. School of Information Technology and Engineering, VIT University, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India

    K. Ganesan

  3. Department of Industrial Technology, Jordan College of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, California State University, Fresno, CA, 93740, USA

    Balaji Sethuramasamyraja

Authors
  1. N. Deepa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Ganesan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Balaji Sethuramasamyraja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Deepa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deepa, N., Ganesan, K. & Sethuramasamyraja, B. Predictive mathematical model for solving multi-criteria decision-making problems. Neural Comput & Applic 31, 6733–6746 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3505-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3505-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation