Skip to main content
Top

2022 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Base Criterion Method (BCM)

Authors : Gholamreza Haseli, Reza Sheikh

Published in: Multiple Criteria Decision Making

Publisher: Springer Nature Singapore

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The base criterion method (BCM) is one of the latest MCDM methods introduced to obtain the weight of the criteria. This method was introduced in 2020 by Haseli et al. The BCM method uses the pairwise comparison approach to obtain the weight of the criteria. This method removes a large number of unnecessary comparisons by dividing pairwise comparisons into two categories: base comparisons and final comparisons. To obtain the weight of the criteria with the BCM method, only base comparisons are needed. In the base comparisons for n criteria, n − 1 pairwise comparisons need to be performed. The results in the BCM method will be fully consistent because instead of the controlling outputs of the pairwise comparisons to measure the inconsistency, the BCM method controls the inputs of pairwise comparisons. By controlling the input values of pairwise comparisons, there will be no more errors in the process of obtaining weights. The zero error accuracy means optimal and full consistent weights. Therefore, the BCM method can obtain the optimal weight of the criteria quite accurately. Also, it is required to perform fewer pairwise comparisons compared to the other existing MCDM methods. In this chapter, examples are provided to become more familiar with the problem-solving process for obtaining the weight of criteria using the BCM method.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
1.
go back to reference Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Hajiagha, S.H., Hashemi, S.S.: Extension of weighted aggregated sum product assessment with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (WASPAS-IVIF). Appl. Soft Comput. 24, 1013–1021 (2014)CrossRef Zavadskas, E.K., Antucheviciene, J., Hajiagha, S.H., Hashemi, S.S.: Extension of weighted aggregated sum product assessment with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (WASPAS-IVIF). Appl. Soft Comput. 24, 1013–1021 (2014)CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Guo, S., Zhao, H.: Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowl.-Based Syst. 121, 23–31 (2017)CrossRef Guo, S., Zhao, H.: Fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Knowl.-Based Syst. 121, 23–31 (2017)CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Kahraman, C., Onar, S.C., Oztaysi, B.: Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 8(4), 637–666 (2015)CrossRef Kahraman, C., Onar, S.C., Oztaysi, B.: Fuzzy multicriteria decision-making: a literature review. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 8(4), 637–666 (2015)CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Mardani, A., Nilashi, M., Zavadskas, E.K., Awang, S.R., Zare, H., Jamal, N.M.: Decision making methods based on fuzzy aggregation operators: Three decades review from 1986 to 2017. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 17(02), 391–466 (2018)CrossRef Mardani, A., Nilashi, M., Zavadskas, E.K., Awang, S.R., Zare, H., Jamal, N.M.: Decision making methods based on fuzzy aggregation operators: Three decades review from 1986 to 2017. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 17(02), 391–466 (2018)CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Liao, H., Wu, X., Liang, X., Xu, J., Herrera, F.: A new hesitant fuzzy linguistic ORESTE method for hybrid multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26(6), 3793–3807 (2018)CrossRef Liao, H., Wu, X., Liang, X., Xu, J., Herrera, F.: A new hesitant fuzzy linguistic ORESTE method for hybrid multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26(6), 3793–3807 (2018)CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015)CrossRef Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53, 49–57 (2015)CrossRef
7.
8.
go back to reference Saaty, T.L.: Theory and applications of the analytic network process: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. RWS publications (2005) Saaty, T.L.: Theory and applications of the analytic network process: decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. RWS publications (2005)
9.
go back to reference Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: some properties and a linear model. Omega 64, 126–130 (2016)CrossRef Rezaei, J.: Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: some properties and a linear model. Omega 64, 126–130 (2016)CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Haseli, G., Sheikh, R., Sana, S.S.: Base-criterion on multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Int. J. Manage. Sci. Eng. Manage. 15(2), 79–88 (2020) Haseli, G., Sheikh, R., Sana, S.S.: Base-criterion on multi-criteria decision-making method and its applications. Int. J. Manage. Sci. Eng. Manage. 15(2), 79–88 (2020)
11.
go back to reference Haseli, G., Sheikh, R., Sana, S.S.: Extension of base-criterion method based on fuzzy set theory. Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 6, 54 (2020)MathSciNetCrossRef Haseli, G., Sheikh, R., Sana, S.S.: Extension of base-criterion method based on fuzzy set theory. Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 6, 54 (2020)MathSciNetCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Saaty, T.L.: What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process? In: Mathematical Models for ,rt, pp. 109–121. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1988) Saaty, T.L.: What is the Analytic Hierarchy Process? In: Mathematical Models for ,rt, pp. 109–121. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1988)
13.
go back to reference Thurstone, L.L.: A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev. 34(4), 273 (1927)CrossRef Thurstone, L.L.: A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev. 34(4), 273 (1927)CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Herman, M.W., Koczkodaj, W.W.: A Monte Carlo study of parwise comparison. Inf. Process. Lett. 57(1), 25–29 (1996)CrossRef Herman, M.W., Koczkodaj, W.W.: A Monte Carlo study of parwise comparison. Inf. Process. Lett. 57(1), 25–29 (1996)CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Forman, E.H., Selly, M.A.: Decision by Objectives: How to Convince Others that you are Right. World Scientific (2001)CrossRef Forman, E.H., Selly, M.A.: Decision by Objectives: How to Convince Others that you are Right. World Scientific (2001)CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Ishizaka, A., Nguyen, N.H.: Calibrated fuzzy AHP for current bank account selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 40(9), 3775–3783 (2013)CrossRef Ishizaka, A., Nguyen, N.H.: Calibrated fuzzy AHP for current bank account selection. Expert Syst. Appl. 40(9), 3775–3783 (2013)CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Dong, J., Wan, S., Chen, S.M.: Fuzzy best-worst method based on triangular fuzzy numbers for multi-criteria decision-making. Inf. Sci. 547, 1080–1104 (2020)MathSciNetCrossRef Dong, J., Wan, S., Chen, S.M.: Fuzzy best-worst method based on triangular fuzzy numbers for multi-criteria decision-making. Inf. Sci. 547, 1080–1104 (2020)MathSciNetCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Liang, F., Brunelli, M., Rezaei, J.: Consistency issues in the best worst method: measurements and thresholds. Omega 96, 102175 (2020) Liang, F., Brunelli, M., Rezaei, J.: Consistency issues in the best worst method: measurements and thresholds. Omega 96, 102175 (2020)
19.
go back to reference Harker, P.T.: Alternative modes of questioning in the analytic hierarchy process. Math. Model. 9(3–5), 353–360 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRef Harker, P.T.: Alternative modes of questioning in the analytic hierarchy process. Math. Model. 9(3–5), 353–360 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Fei, L., Lu, J., Feng, Y.: An extended best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method by belief functions and its applications in hospital service evaluation. Comput. Ind. Eng. 142, 106355 (2020) Fei, L., Lu, J., Feng, Y.: An extended best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method by belief functions and its applications in hospital service evaluation. Comput. Ind. Eng. 142, 106355 (2020)
21.
go back to reference Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. In: Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems, pp. 394–432 (1965) Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. In: Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems, pp. 394–432 (1965)
22.
go back to reference Rashidi, K., Cullinane, K.: A comparison of fuzzy DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS in sustainable supplier selection: Implications for sourcing strategy. Expert Syst. Appl. 121, 266–281 (2019)CrossRef Rashidi, K., Cullinane, K.: A comparison of fuzzy DEA and fuzzy TOPSIS in sustainable supplier selection: Implications for sourcing strategy. Expert Syst. Appl. 121, 266–281 (2019)CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Rezaei, J.: Piecewise linear value functions for multi-criteria decision-making. Expert Syst. Appl. 98, 43–56 (2018)CrossRef Rezaei, J.: Piecewise linear value functions for multi-criteria decision-making. Expert Syst. Appl. 98, 43–56 (2018)CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Saaty, T.L.: How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48(1), 9–26 (1990)CrossRef Saaty, T.L.: How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48(1), 9–26 (1990)CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Base Criterion Method (BCM)
Authors
Gholamreza Haseli
Reza Sheikh
Copyright Year
2022
Publisher
Springer Nature Singapore
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7414-3_2

Premium Partners