Devin Waas, Made Dona Wahyu Arsitana, I. P. H. Permana, I. K. Wiratama, I. Sudipa
{"title":"基于SMART-COPELAND SCORE模型的群体决策支持系统中最佳选择对","authors":"Devin Waas, Made Dona Wahyu Arsitana, I. P. H. Permana, I. K. Wiratama, I. Sudipa","doi":"10.31315/telematika.v19i1.7181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Adjust the Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model in completing case studies of selecting the best alternative candidate pairs for the OSIS core board with many decision-makers and problems in the differences in the preferences of decision-makers as well as modeling in decision making with multi-criteria and multi-attributes and combining preferences decision-makers to choose the best alternative partner candidate.Design/methodology/approach: The Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model combines the SMART method for modeling multi-criteria and multi-attribute assessments and the Copeland Score model for aggregating the judgments of five decision-makers against the selected pair of OSIS core board candidates using a voting mechanism.Findings/result: The comparison test for the manual calculation of the SMART- Copeland Score Model method with the results of the system calculation is the same. From the ten alternative data in the first stage of the test through the SMART method calculation, it then passes into four alternatives divided into two alternative candidate pairs, namely alternative candidate pairs (A1, A3) and alternative candidate pairs (A2, A4). The second stage test uses calculations Copeland Score voting, which produces the best alternative candidate pair, namely alternative (A1, A3) with a final point score = 4.Originality/value/state of the art: Based on a review of previous research, this study uses line-up criteria, written tests, and interview tests with the SMART method to calculate alternative scores on each criteria, and the Copeland Score model to aggregate decision makers' preferences to produce the best alternative candidate pairs. In calculating the final value of the alternative ranking.","PeriodicalId":31716,"journal":{"name":"Telematika","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group Decision Support System Using SMART-COPELAND SCORE Model In Choosing The Best Alternative Pair\",\"authors\":\"Devin Waas, Made Dona Wahyu Arsitana, I. P. H. Permana, I. K. Wiratama, I. Sudipa\",\"doi\":\"10.31315/telematika.v19i1.7181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Adjust the Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model in completing case studies of selecting the best alternative candidate pairs for the OSIS core board with many decision-makers and problems in the differences in the preferences of decision-makers as well as modeling in decision making with multi-criteria and multi-attributes and combining preferences decision-makers to choose the best alternative partner candidate.Design/methodology/approach: The Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model combines the SMART method for modeling multi-criteria and multi-attribute assessments and the Copeland Score model for aggregating the judgments of five decision-makers against the selected pair of OSIS core board candidates using a voting mechanism.Findings/result: The comparison test for the manual calculation of the SMART- Copeland Score Model method with the results of the system calculation is the same. From the ten alternative data in the first stage of the test through the SMART method calculation, it then passes into four alternatives divided into two alternative candidate pairs, namely alternative candidate pairs (A1, A3) and alternative candidate pairs (A2, A4). The second stage test uses calculations Copeland Score voting, which produces the best alternative candidate pair, namely alternative (A1, A3) with a final point score = 4.Originality/value/state of the art: Based on a review of previous research, this study uses line-up criteria, written tests, and interview tests with the SMART method to calculate alternative scores on each criteria, and the Copeland Score model to aggregate decision makers' preferences to produce the best alternative candidate pairs. In calculating the final value of the alternative ranking.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Telematika\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Telematika\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31315/telematika.v19i1.7181\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telematika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31315/telematika.v19i1.7181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目的:调整群体决策支持系统(Group Decision Support System, GDSS)模型,完成多决策者的OSIS核心板最佳备选人选对选择的案例研究和决策者偏好差异问题,以及多标准多属性决策建模,结合偏好决策者选择最佳备选搭档人选。设计/方法/方法:群体决策支持系统(GDSS)模型结合了SMART方法,用于建模多标准和多属性评估,以及Copeland评分模型,用于通过投票机制汇总五个决策者对选定的sis核心董事会候选人的判断。发现/结果:人工计算SMART- Copeland评分模型方法与系统计算结果的对比检验相同。从第一阶段测试的10个备选数据通过SMART方法计算,然后传递到4个备选数据,分为两个备选备选数据对,即备选备选数据对(A1, A3)和备选备选数据对(A2, A4)。第二阶段测试使用计算Copeland得分投票,产生最佳备选候选人对,即最终得分= 4的备选(A1, A3)。原创性/价值/技术水平:在回顾以往研究的基础上,本研究使用阵容标准、笔试和面试测试,采用SMART方法计算每个标准的备选分数,并使用Copeland评分模型汇总决策者的偏好,以产生最佳备选候选人对。在计算备选排名的最终值时。
Group Decision Support System Using SMART-COPELAND SCORE Model In Choosing The Best Alternative Pair
Purpose: Adjust the Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model in completing case studies of selecting the best alternative candidate pairs for the OSIS core board with many decision-makers and problems in the differences in the preferences of decision-makers as well as modeling in decision making with multi-criteria and multi-attributes and combining preferences decision-makers to choose the best alternative partner candidate.Design/methodology/approach: The Group Decision Support System (GDSS) model combines the SMART method for modeling multi-criteria and multi-attribute assessments and the Copeland Score model for aggregating the judgments of five decision-makers against the selected pair of OSIS core board candidates using a voting mechanism.Findings/result: The comparison test for the manual calculation of the SMART- Copeland Score Model method with the results of the system calculation is the same. From the ten alternative data in the first stage of the test through the SMART method calculation, it then passes into four alternatives divided into two alternative candidate pairs, namely alternative candidate pairs (A1, A3) and alternative candidate pairs (A2, A4). The second stage test uses calculations Copeland Score voting, which produces the best alternative candidate pair, namely alternative (A1, A3) with a final point score = 4.Originality/value/state of the art: Based on a review of previous research, this study uses line-up criteria, written tests, and interview tests with the SMART method to calculate alternative scores on each criteria, and the Copeland Score model to aggregate decision makers' preferences to produce the best alternative candidate pairs. In calculating the final value of the alternative ranking.