BHARAT: A simple and effective multi-criteria decision-making method that does not need fuzzy logic, Part-1: Multi-attribute decision-making applications in the industrial environment
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A simple and effective multi-criteria decision-making methodology named as “Best Holistic Adaptable Ranking of Attributes Technique (BHARAT)” is proposed that can be used in single- as well as group decision-making scenarios of the industrial environment. The attributes data for various alternatives can be quantitative or qualitative (i.e., expressed in linguistic terms). This paper proposes to transform the qualitative attributes into quantitative attributes by means of simple linear scales rather than complex fuzzy scales. The proposed BHARAT method normalizes the data with reference to the “best” alternative corresponding to an attribute and the normalization procedure is repeated for all the attributes to get the normalized data. A group of decision-makers or a decision-maker assigns ranks to the attributes according to how important they are deemed to be, and these ranks are then transformed into the proper weights. The total scores of the alternatives are calculated by multiplying the weights of the attributes by the corresponding normalized data of the attributes for different alternatives. Four industrial case studies are presented to illustrate the potential of the suggested BHARAT method. The first case study deals with the problem of an automated warehouse selection for a large industrial plant involving a single decision-maker, 13 attributes, and 4 alternative warehouses; the second case study deals with the problem of sustainable maintenance service provider selection for a large petrochemical plant involving fuzzy group decision-making with 5 decision-makers, 9 attributes, and 4 alternative maintenance service providers; the third case study deals with the problem of alternative strategy selection for implementation of a make-to-order system for passenger car manufacturers involving 6 factors, 18 sub-factors, and 3 alternative strategies; and the fourth case study deals with the problem of process parameters selection in a sustainable high speed turning operation involving 4 attributes and 9 alternative sets of experimental conditions. The results of the proposed decision-making method and its second version are compared with the other popular decision-making methods. The proposed method and its another version are proved simple, effective, powerful, flexible, easy to apply, do not require the use of fuzzy logic, offer logical and consistent procedures to assign weights to the attributes, and are applicable to different decision-making scenarios of the industries. Part-1 of this paper describes the applications of the BHARAT method to multi-attribute decision-making problems and Part-2 describes the evaluation of Pareto solutions using the BHARAT method in multiple objective decision-making problems.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».