Sibel Satici
{"title":"FARKLI NORMALİZASYON TEKNİKLERİNİN ÇOK KRİTERLİ KARAR VERME YÖNTEMLERİNE ETKİSİ: WASPAS ÖRNEĞİ","authors":"Sibel Satici","doi":"10.33416/baybem.956527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are used to select the most suitable alternatives in line with the determined criteria. Since the criteria have different measurement units, normalization methods are used to make the measurement units of the criteria dimensionless. However, there is no consensus on which normalization technique should be used in which MCDM method. The aim of this study is to investigate how 7 different normalization techniques affect the results of the WASPAS method, which is one of the MCDM methods. In practice, the performance of 7 vacuum cleaners belonging to different companies, which are small household appliances and whose names are kept confidential, was evaluated under 6 criteria. Shapiro Wilk test was used to analyze the conformity of WASPAS results to normal distribution. Pearson correlation test was applied to normally distributed results and the relationship between normalization techniques was examined. When the results obtained were examined, it was seen that Linear Normalization (Sum) and Vector Normalization techniques could be used as an alternative to the normalization technique used in the original for the WASPAS method. It was concluded that Linear Normalization (Max-Min) technique gave the worst results compared to other normalization techniques and was not suitable for the WASPAS method.","PeriodicalId":176205,"journal":{"name":"İşletme Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"İşletme Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33416/baybem.956527","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

采用多准则决策(Multi-Criteria Decision Making, MCDM)方法,根据确定的标准选择最合适的方案。由于准则具有不同的度量单位,因此采用归一化方法使准则的度量单位无因次化。然而,对于哪种规范化技术应该用于哪种MCDM方法,目前还没有达成共识。本研究的目的是探讨7种不同的归一化技术如何影响WASPAS方法的结果,WASPAS方法是MCDM方法之一。在实际操作中,对7台属于不同企业的小家电、名称保密的吸尘器进行了6项评价。采用Shapiro Wilk检验分析WASPAS结果与正态分布的符合性。正态分布结果采用Pearson相关检验,并检验归一化技术之间的关系。当对得到的结果进行检查时,可以看到线性归一化(Sum)和向量归一化技术可以用作原始WASPAS方法中使用的归一化技术的替代方案。与其他归一化技术相比,线性归一化(Max-Min)技术的结果最差,不适合WASPAS方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
FARKLI NORMALİZASYON TEKNİKLERİNİN ÇOK KRİTERLİ KARAR VERME YÖNTEMLERİNE ETKİSİ: WASPAS ÖRNEĞİ
Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are used to select the most suitable alternatives in line with the determined criteria. Since the criteria have different measurement units, normalization methods are used to make the measurement units of the criteria dimensionless. However, there is no consensus on which normalization technique should be used in which MCDM method. The aim of this study is to investigate how 7 different normalization techniques affect the results of the WASPAS method, which is one of the MCDM methods. In practice, the performance of 7 vacuum cleaners belonging to different companies, which are small household appliances and whose names are kept confidential, was evaluated under 6 criteria. Shapiro Wilk test was used to analyze the conformity of WASPAS results to normal distribution. Pearson correlation test was applied to normally distributed results and the relationship between normalization techniques was examined. When the results obtained were examined, it was seen that Linear Normalization (Sum) and Vector Normalization techniques could be used as an alternative to the normalization technique used in the original for the WASPAS method. It was concluded that Linear Normalization (Max-Min) technique gave the worst results compared to other normalization techniques and was not suitable for the WASPAS method.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信