A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers
A multitude of techniques fall under the domain of Multi- Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) which is used to select the best alternative among the available ones. The objective of this paper is to compare some of these techniques with respect to the problem of selection of 3D printers, which is associ...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Growing Science
2015-07-01
|
| Series: | Management Science Letters |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.growingscience.com/msl/Vol5/msl_2015_58.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849408750274740224 |
|---|---|
| author | Debapriyo Paul Puneet Kumar Agarwal Gourab Gopal Mondal Debamalya Banerjee |
| author_facet | Debapriyo Paul Puneet Kumar Agarwal Gourab Gopal Mondal Debamalya Banerjee |
| author_sort | Debapriyo Paul |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A multitude of techniques fall under the domain of Multi- Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) which is used to select the best alternative among the available ones. The objective of this paper is to compare some of these techniques with respect to the problem of selection of 3D printers, which is associated with multiple attributes. The weights of the criteria were determined using analytical network process (ANP). Next, the alternatives were ranked using three different MCDM techniques- 1.TOPSIS which ranks alternatives having the shortest distance to the ideal solution as well as the greatest distance from the negative-ideal solution 2. Deng’s Similarity based Approach where the most preferred alternative should have the highest degree of similarity to the positive ideal solution and the lowest degree of similarity to the negative-ideal solution and 3.PROMETHEE and GAIA. The solutions for each of these three cases were analyzed thoroughly, and reasons for any deviations were discussed. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-7a5e4c6358ab4da4a3d57389a2005fa8 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1923-2934 1923-9343 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2015-07-01 |
| publisher | Growing Science |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Management Science Letters |
| spelling | doaj-art-7a5e4c6358ab4da4a3d57389a2005fa82025-08-20T03:35:41ZengGrowing ScienceManagement Science Letters1923-29341923-93432015-07-015769570810.5267/j.msl.2015.5.003A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printersDebapriyo PaulPuneet Kumar AgarwalGourab Gopal Mondal Debamalya Banerjee A multitude of techniques fall under the domain of Multi- Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) which is used to select the best alternative among the available ones. The objective of this paper is to compare some of these techniques with respect to the problem of selection of 3D printers, which is associated with multiple attributes. The weights of the criteria were determined using analytical network process (ANP). Next, the alternatives were ranked using three different MCDM techniques- 1.TOPSIS which ranks alternatives having the shortest distance to the ideal solution as well as the greatest distance from the negative-ideal solution 2. Deng’s Similarity based Approach where the most preferred alternative should have the highest degree of similarity to the positive ideal solution and the lowest degree of similarity to the negative-ideal solution and 3.PROMETHEE and GAIA. The solutions for each of these three cases were analyzed thoroughly, and reasons for any deviations were discussed.http://www.growingscience.com/msl/Vol5/msl_2015_58.pdf3D PrintingANPTOPSISSimilarity MethodPROMETHEEHybrid MCDMComparative analysis |
| spellingShingle | Debapriyo Paul Puneet Kumar Agarwal Gourab Gopal Mondal Debamalya Banerjee A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers Management Science Letters 3D Printing ANP TOPSIS Similarity Method PROMETHEE Hybrid MCDM Comparative analysis |
| title | A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers |
| title_full | A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers |
| title_fullStr | A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers |
| title_short | A comparative analysis of different hybrid MCDM techniques considering a case of selection of 3D printers |
| title_sort | comparative analysis of different hybrid mcdm techniques considering a case of selection of 3d printers |
| topic | 3D Printing ANP TOPSIS Similarity Method PROMETHEE Hybrid MCDM Comparative analysis |
| url | http://www.growingscience.com/msl/Vol5/msl_2015_58.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT debapriyopaul acomparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT puneetkumaragarwal acomparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT gourabgopalmondal acomparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT debamalyabanerjee acomparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT debapriyopaul comparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT puneetkumaragarwal comparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT gourabgopalmondal comparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters AT debamalyabanerjee comparativeanalysisofdifferenthybridmcdmtechniquesconsideringacaseofselectionof3dprinters |