Abstract
One of the essential problems in multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) is ranking a set of alternatives based on a set of criteria. In this regard, there exist several MCDM methods which rank the alternatives in different ways. As such, it would be worthwhile to try and arrive at a consensus on this important subject. In this paper, a new approach is proposed based on the half-quadratic (HQ) theory. The proposed approach determines an optimal weight for each of the MCDM ranking methods, which are used to compute the aggregated final ranking. The weight of each ranking method is obtained via a minimizer function that is inspired by the HQ theory, which automatically fulfills the basic constraints of weights in MCDM. The proposed framework also provides a consensus index and a trust level for the aggregated ranking. To illustrate the proposed approach, the evaluation and comparison of ontology alignment systems are modeled as an MCDM problem and the proposed framework is applied to the ontology alignment evaluation initiative (OAEI) 2018, for which the ranking of participating systems is of the utmost importance.
Highlights
Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) is a branch of Operations Research that has numerous applications in a variety of areas involving real decision-making problems
The weights in the proposed method were computed using the minimizer functions inspired in the HQ theory, but it satisfied the basic properties of weights in MCDM
Using multiple performance metrics, the ranking of ontology alignment systems was modeled as an MCDM problem, where the systems and the performance metrics served as alternatives and criteria, respectively
Summary
Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) is a branch of Operations Research that has numerous applications in a variety of areas involving real decision-making problems. By the same token, Ping et al [42] has proposed an optimization problem to determine the weight of each individual MCDM method and aggregate them . The optimization problem assumes that the final aggregated ranking is a weighted linear combination of the rankings provided by different MCDM methods, and it tries to determine the weights . These methods do come up with a final aggregated ranking, they do not provide any further information about the consensus or reliability of the aggregated ranking
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
