Research ArticlesNo Access

Rank Reversal and the VIKOR Method: An Empirical Evaluation

Blanca Ceballos

Department of Computer Science and A.I., Universidad de Granada, Spain

Search for more papers by this author

David A. Pelta

Department of Computer Science and A.I., Universidad de Granada, Spain

E-mail Address: dpelta@decsai.ugr.es

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

, and

María T. Lamata

Department of Computer Science and A.I., Universidad de Granada, Spain

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622017500237Cited by:26 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

Rank reversal is a common phenomenon in multi-criteria decision-making methods. It appears when the addition/deletion of new options to the alternatives’ set produces a change in the original ranking. In this contribution, we want to assess this phenomenon in the context of the VIKOR method. Using randomly generated multi-criteria decision problems, we confirmed that rank reversal existed and strongly depended on VIKOR’s parameter. Also, we observed that the influence of the number of alternatives was stronger than that of the number of criteria. Finally, although rank reversal may exist, we saw that it may not affect the top alternative of the ranking, thus potentially having a low impact.

Keywords:

References

1. E. Triantaphyllou , Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Vol. 44, Applied Optimization (Springer, Dordrecht, 2000). Crossref, Google Scholar
2. T. Saaty , The Analytic Hierarchy Process (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980). Google Scholar
3. C. Hwang and K. Yoon , Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction (SAGE Publications, California, 1995). Google Scholar
4. D.-H. Peng, C.-Y. Gao and L.-L. Zhai , Multi-criteria group decision making with heterogeneous information based on ideal points concept, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 6 (4), 616–625 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. J. Brans, B. Mareschal and P. Vincke , Promethee: A new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis, in Operational Research ’84, Proc. of the Tenth Int. Conf. (1984), pp. 477–490. Google Scholar
6. S. Opricovic , Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems (Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade, 1998). Google Scholar
7. S. Opricovic and G.-H. Tzeng , Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research 156 (2), 445–455 (2004). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. J. San Cristobal , Multi-criteria decision-making in the selection of a renewable energy project in Spain: The Vikor method, Renewable Energy 36 (2), 498–502 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. W.-Y. Chiu, G.-H. Tzeng and H.-L. Li . A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business, Knowledge-Based Systems 37, 48–61 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. M. Mokhtarian, S. Sadi-Nezhad and A. Makui , A new flexible and reliable interval valued fuzzy VIKOR method based on uncertainty risk reduction in decision making process: An application for determining a suitable location for digging some pits for municipal wet waste landfill, Computers & Industrial Engineering 78, 213–233 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. G. Akman , Evaluating suppliers to include green supplier development programs via fuzzy c-means and VIKOR methods, Computers & Industrial Engineering 86, 69–82 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. E. Zavadskas and Z. Turskis , Multiple criteria decision making (mcdm) methods in economics: An overview, Technological and Economic Development of Economy 17 (2), 397–427 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. T. Saaty and M. Sagir , An essay on rank preservation and reversal, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 49 (5–6), 1230–1243 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. V. Belton and T.Gear , On a short-coming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies, Omega 11 (3), 228–230 (1983). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. T. Saaty and L. Vargas , The legitimacy of rank reversal, Omega 12 (5), 513–516 (1984). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. V. Belton and T. Gear , The legitimacy of rank reversal-a comment, Omega 13 (3), 143–144 (1985). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. J. Barzilai and B. Golany , AHP rank reversal, normalization and aggregation rules, Information Systems and Operational Research 32 (2), 57–63 (1994). Crossref, Google Scholar
18. J. Dyer , Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process, Management Science 36 (3) (1990) 249–258. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. H. Maleki and S. Zahir , A Comprehensive literature review of the rank reversal phenomenon in the analytic hierarchy process, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 20 (3–4), 141–155 (2013). Crossref, Google Scholar
20. T. Saaty and L. Vargas , Experiments on rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 17 (4–5), 13–18 (1993). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. Y. Wang and Y. Luo , On rank reversal in decision analysis, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 49 (5–6), 1221–1229 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
22. B. Mareschal, Y. De Smet and P. Nemery , Rank reversal in the PROMETHEE II method: Some new results, in 2008 IEEE Int. Conf. Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEE, 2008), pp. 959–963. Google Scholar
23. C. Verly and Y. Smet , Some results about rank reversal instances in the PROMETHEE methods, International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making 3 (4), 325 (2013). Crossref, Google Scholar
24. X. Wang and E. Triantaphyllou , Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods, Omega 36 (1), 45–63 (2008). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
25. F. Kong, W. Wei and J.-H. Gong , Rank reversal and rank preservation in anp method, Journal of Discrete Mathematical Sciences and Cryptography 19 (3), 821–836 (2016). Crossref, Google Scholar
26. G. Dede, T. Kamalakis and T. Sphicopoulos , Convergence properties and practical estimation of the probability of rank reversal in pairwise comparisons for multi-criteria decision making problems, European Journal of Operational Research 241 (2), 458–468 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. M. S. Garcia-Cascales and M. T. Lamata , On rank reversal and TOPSIS method, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 56 (5–6), 123–132 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
28. E. Cables, M. Lamata and J. Verdegay , Rim-reference ideal method in multicriteria decision making, Information Sciences 337, 1–10 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar