Comparing Subjective Weighting Methods in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making: An Application to Electric Bicycle Ranking
Received: 3 February 2025 | Revised: 16 February 2025 | Accepted: 21 February 2025 | Online: 6 March 2025
Corresponding author: Hoang Xuan Thinh
Abstract
Ranking the various electric bicycle models available in the market, each with different specifications, is a complex task. The importance of criteria in this process depends on subjective weighting methodsbecause the assigned weights to the criteria are based on the decision-maker's subjective priorities. This study compares three subjective weighting methods, namely the Rank Order Centroid (ROC) method, the Rank Sum (RS) method, and a method based on the Lagrange multiplier (referred to as the Lagrange method). These methods share the common characteristic of deriving weights from the evaluation of criteria, yet they differ in their specific formulas. The three methods were applied to assign weights to the criteria used in evaluating seven electric bicycle models across 10 different criteria. The weights were calculated under 10 different scenarios, each reflecting a change in the prioritization of criteria. For each scenario, four Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods were used to rank the electric bicycles: Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Ranking of Alternatives with Weights of Criterion (RAWEC), Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV), and Root Assessment Method (RAM). The comparison of weighting methods was based on the average Spearman rank correlation coefficient between the MCDM rankings obtained using different weighting methods. The findings indicate that the ROC and Lagrange methods outperformed the RS method.
Keywords:
MCDM, subjective weighting, electric bicycle ranking, Spearman rank correlation coefficientDownloads
References
M. Pouresmaieli, M. Ataei, A. Nouri Qarahasanlou, and A. Barabadi, "Multi-criteria Decision-making Methods for Sustainable Decision-making in the Mining Industry (A Comprehensive Study)," Journal of Mining and Environment, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 683–706, Apr. 2024.
L. Zhang and W. Chen, "Multi-criteria group decision-making with cloud model and TOPSIS for alternative selection under uncertainty," Soft Computing, vol. 26, no. 22, pp. 12509–12529, Nov. 2022.
D. T. Do, "Assessing the Impact of Criterion Weights on the Ranking of the Top Ten Universities in Vietnam," Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 14899–14903, Aug. 2024.
F. F. da Silva, C. L. M. Souza, F. F. Silva, H. G. Costa, H. R. M. da Hora, and M. E. Junior, "Elicitation of criteria weights for multicriteria models: Bibliometrics, typologies, characteristics and applications," Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 1–28, Apr. 2021.
Y. Dorfeshan, R. Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, F. Jolai, and S. M. Mousavi, "A new grey decision model-based reference point method for decision makers and criteria weight, and final ranking," Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 284–297, Jul. 2022.
T. V. Dua, D. V. Duc, N. C. Bao, and D. D. Trung, "Integration of objective weighting methods for criteria and MCDM methods: application in material selection," EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, no. 2, pp. 131–148, Mar. 2024.
D. Liu, T. Li, and D. Liang, "An integrated approach towards modeling ranked weights," Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 147, Sep. 2020, Art. no. 106629.
E. Roszkowska, "Rank Ordering Criteria Weighting Methods – a Comparative Overview," Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne, vol. 5, no. 65, pp. 14–33, 2013.
M. del M. Casanovas-Rubio and B. Vinolas, "New method for assigning cardinal weights in multi-criteria decision-making: the constant weight ratio method," Operational Research, vol. 24, no. 2, May 2024, Art. no. 28.
B. S. Ahn, "Compatible weighting method with rank order centroid: Maximum entropy ordered weighted averaging approach," European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 212, no. 3, pp. 552–559, Aug. 2011.
O. Uzhga-Rebrov and G. Kuļešova, "A Review and Comparative Analysis of Methods for Determining Criteria Weights in MCDM Tasks," Information Technology and Management Science, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 35–40, Nov. 2023.
H. K. Alfares and S. O. Duffuaa, "Simulation-Based Evaluation of Criteria Rank-Weighting Methods in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, vol. 15, no. 01, pp. 43–61, Jan. 2016.
D. D. Trung, "Application of TOPSIS an PIV Methods for Multi - Criteria Decision Making in Hard Turning Process," Journal of Machine Engineering, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 57–71, Dec. 2021.
M. Arif, J. E. Suseno, and R. R. Isnanto, "Multi-Criteria Decision Making with the VIKOR and SMARTER Methods for Optimal Seller Selection from Several E-Marketplaces," E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 202, 2020, Art. no. 14002.
M. J. Kadenge, M. Mkandawile, and V. G. Masanja, "Multi-Criteria Decision Making and Numerical Optimization Approaches for Optimizing Water Loss Management Strategies in Water Distribution System - A case of Urban Water Supply and Sanitation Authorities in Tanzania," International Journal of Mathematical Sciences and Computing, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 10–24, Feb. 2020.
M. A. Hatefi, "An Improved Rank Order Centroid Method (IROC) for Criteria Weight Estimation: An Application in the Engine/Vehicle Selection Problem," Informatica, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 249–270, Apr. 2023.
T. Varshney et al., "Investigation of rank order centroid method for optimal generation control," Scientific Reports, vol. 14, no. 1, May 2024, Art. no. 11267.
M. O. Esangbedo, J. Xue, S. Bai, and C. O. Esangbedo, "Relaxed Rank Order Centroid Weighting MCDM Method With Improved Grey Relational Analysis for Subcontractor Selection: Photothermal Power Station Construction," IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 71, pp. 3044–3061, 2024.
H. T. Dung, D. T. Do, and V. T. Nguyen, "Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods Using The Same Data Standardization Method," Strojnícky časopis - Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 57–72, Nov. 2022.
X. T. Hoang, "Multi-Objective Optimization of Turning Process by Fuca Method," Strojnícky časopis - Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 55–66, May 2023.
D. D. Trung, H. X. Thinh, and L. D. Ha, "Comparison of the RAFSI and PIV method in multi-criteria decision making: application to turning processes," International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering, vol. 13, 2022, Art. no. 14.
M. B. Barfod and S. Leleur, Eds., Multi-criteria decision analysis for use in transport decision making, 2nd ed. Copenhagen, Denmark: DTU Transport, 2014.
D. D. Trung, "Multi-criteria decision making under the MARCOS method and the weighting methods: applied to milling, grinding and turning processes," Manufacturing Review, vol. 9, 2022, Art. no. 3.
B. Ahcène and P. Jérôme, "A new method for determining the weights in multi-criteria decision making based on ordinal ranking of criteria and lagrange multiplier," Metallurgical and Mining Industry, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 22–31, 2017.
M. Bouhedja, S. Bouhedja, and A. Benselhoub, "Testing the suitability of vector normalization procedure in topsis method: application to wheel loader selection," Technology audit and production reserves, vol. 2, no. 76, pp. 52–62, Apr. 2024.
T. Van Huy et al., "Multi-criteria decision-making for electric bicycle selection," Advanced Engineering Letters, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 126–135, 2022.
M. Madanchian and H. Taherdoost, "A Comprehensive Guide to the TOPSIS Method for Multi-criteria Decision Making," Sustainable Social Development, vol. 1, no. 1, Aug. 2023, Art. no. 2220.
A. Puska, A. Stilić, D. Pamucar, D. Bozanic, and M. Nedeljkovic, "Introducing a Novel multi-criteria Ranking of Alternatives with Weights of Criterion (RAWEC) model," MethodsX, vol. 12, Jun. 2024, Art. no. 102628.
D. D. Trung, "The Combination of Taguchi – Entropy – WASPAS - PIV Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision Making when External Cylindrical Grinding of 65G Steel," Journal of Machine Engineering, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 90–105, Dec. 2021.
N. T. D. Linh, N. H. Son, and D. X. Thao, "Evaluating the Impact of Weighting Methods on the Stability of Scores for Alternatives in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problems," Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 19998–20004, Feb. 2025.
A. Sotoudeh-Anvari, "Root Assessment Method (RAM): A novel multi-criteria decision making method and its applications in sustainability challenges," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 423, Oct. 2023, Art. no. 138695.
D. D. Trung, D. V. Duc, N. C. Bao, N. H. Son, and M. T. Diep, "Application of probability theory in machine selection," Applied Engineering Letters, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 203–214, 2024.
P. Aazagreyir, P. Appiahene, O. Appiah, and S. Boateng, "Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-making Methods for Quality of Service-based Web Service Selection," IAES International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1408–1419, 2023.
Downloads
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Nguyen Truong Giang, Hoang Xuan Thinh, Nguyen Truong Giang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after its publication in ETASR with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
