Multi-criteria decision-based hybrid energy selection system using CRITIC weighted CODAS approach

IF 2.7 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES

Scientific African Pub Date : 2024-09-18 DOI:10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02372

Olumuyiwa Taiwo Amusan , Nnamdi Ikechi Nwulu , Saheed Lekan Gbadamosi

{"title":"Multi-criteria decision-based hybrid energy selection system using CRITIC weighted CODAS approach","authors":"Olumuyiwa Taiwo Amusan , Nnamdi Ikechi Nwulu , Saheed Lekan Gbadamosi","doi":"10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>A complex and multicriteria decision making (MCDM) problem arises in a bid to select the most appropriate hybrid energy system among several combinations in distributed electricity generation as it involves conflicting criteria that must be simultaneously considered. In this work, Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) along with Combinative Distance-Based Assessment (CODAS) was employed to select a suitable hybrid energy system combination for water pumping from four conflicting alternatives of Biomass-Battery (S1), PV-Battery (S2), PV-Biomass (S3), and PV-Biomass-Battery (S4) by objective weight estimation. This was followed by a confirmation by the Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method for the solution. The results presented show that CRITIC method reveals 0.275, 0.224, 0.248, and 0.252 as different weights of the four alternatives of S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively. The ranking results reveal S4 as the best alternative based on an assessment score of 0.4693. The same hybrid system was confirmed by ARAS based on overall performance and degree of utility of 0.287697 and 0.823716, respectively.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21690,"journal":{"name":"Scientific African","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article e02372"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific African","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468227624003144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

A complex and multicriteria decision making (MCDM) problem arises in a bid to select the most appropriate hybrid energy system among several combinations in distributed electricity generation as it involves conflicting criteria that must be simultaneously considered. In this work, Criteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation (CRITIC) along with Combinative Distance-Based Assessment (CODAS) was employed to select a suitable hybrid energy system combination for water pumping from four conflicting alternatives of Biomass-Battery (S1), PV-Battery (S2), PV-Biomass (S3), and PV-Biomass-Battery (S4) by objective weight estimation. This was followed by a confirmation by the Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method for the solution. The results presented show that CRITIC method reveals 0.275, 0.224, 0.248, and 0.252 as different weights of the four alternatives of S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively. The ranking results reveal S4 as the best alternative based on an assessment score of 0.4693. The same hybrid system was confirmed by ARAS based on overall performance and degree of utility of 0.287697 and 0.823716, respectively.

查看原文本刊更多论文

使用 CRITIC 加权 CODAS 方法的基于多标准决策的混合能源选择系统

在分布式发电过程中，要从多个组合中选择最合适的混合能源系统，会出现一个复杂的多标准决策（MCDM）问题，因为它涉及到必须同时考虑的相互冲突的标准。在这项工作中，采用了 "通过标准间相关性确定标准重要性"（CRITIC）和 "基于组合距离的评估"（CODAS），通过客观权重估算，从生物质-电池（S1）、光伏-电池（S2）、光伏-生物质（S3）和光伏-生物质-电池（S4）这四个相互冲突的备选方案中，选择一个合适的混合能源系统组合用于抽水。随后，采用加法比率评估（ARAS）方法对解决方案进行了确认。结果显示，CRITIC 方法显示 S1、S2、S3 和 S4 四个备选方案的不同权重分别为 0.275、0.224、0.248 和 0.252。排序结果显示，S4 是最佳选择，评估得分为 0.4693。基于 0.287697 和 0.823716 的总体性能和实用程度，ARAS 确认了相同的混合系统。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Scientific African Multidisciplinary-Multidisciplinary

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

3.40%

发文量

332

审稿时长

10 weeks