A fuzzy AHP multi-criteria decision-making approach applied to combined cooling, heating and power production systems
Most of the real-world multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems contain a mixture of quantitative and qualitative criteria; therefore quantitative MCDM methods are inadequate for handling this type of decision problems. In this paper, a MCDM method based on the Fuzzy Sets Theory and on the Ana...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2011 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena(UPCT) |
| Repositorio: | Repositorio Digital UPCT |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.upct.es:10317/4022 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10317/4022 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Fuzzy MCDM AHP Trapezoidal fuzzy numbers α-cuts CCHP system Proyectos de Ingeniería |
| Sumario: | Most of the real-world multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems contain a mixture of quantitative and qualitative criteria; therefore quantitative MCDM methods are inadequate for handling this type of decision problems. In this paper, a MCDM method based on the Fuzzy Sets Theory and on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is proposed. This method incorporates a number of perspectives on how to approach the fuzzy MCDM problem, as follows: (1) combining quantitative and qualitative criteria (2) expressing criteria pair-wise comparison in linguistic terms and performance of the alternative on each criterion in linguistic terms or exact values when criterion is qualitative or quantitative, respectively, (3) converting all the assessments into trapezoidal fuzzy numbers, (4) using the difference minimization method to calculate the local weight of criteria, employing the algebraic operations of fuzzy numbers based on the concept of α-cuts, (4) calculating the global weight of criteria and the global performance of each alternative using geometric mean and the weighted sum, respectively, (5) using the centroid method to rank the alternatives. Finally, an illustrative example on evaluation of several combined cooling, heat and power production systems is used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology. |
|---|