ARAS VE MOOSRA YÖNTEMLERİNİN PERFORMANS SONUÇLARININ KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI: AMERİKA KITASI ÜLKELERİ

Year 2020, , 173 - 186, 30.06.2020

Hakan Altın

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2020.1212

Abstract

Amaç- Çalışmanın temel amacı ARAS VE MOOSRA performans sonuçlarının karşılaştırılmasıdır. Bunun için Amerika Kıtasında yer alan 31 ülkenin 2020 yılı makroekonomik verileri kullanılmıştır
Metodoloji- Çalışmada ağırlıklandırma ölçütleri olarak CRITIC ve ENTOPY yöntemleri ile ARAS ve MOOSRA metotları uygulanmıştır.
Bulgular- Uygulama aşamasından üç önemli sonuç elde edilmiştir. Birincisi, CRITIC ve ENTOPY ağırlıklandırma ölçütleriyle yapılan ARAS yöntemi performans sıralamasında birbirine çok yakın sonuçlar vermektedir. Dolayısıyla, ARAS yöntemi kullanılan bir çalışmada ağırlıklandırma ölçütleri arasında seçim problemi yaşanmaz. İkincisi, CRITIC ve ENTOPY ağırlıklandırma ölçütleriyle yapılan MOOSRA yöntemi performans sıralamasında birbirine çok yakın sonuçlar vermektedir. Dolayısıyla, MOOSRA yöntemi kullanılan bir çalışmada ağırlıklandırma ölçütleri arasında seçim problemi yaşanmaz. Üçüncüsü ARAS ve MOOSRA yöntemleri performans sıralama sonuçları birbirine çok yakındır.
Sonuç- Buna göre, çok kriterli karar verme problemin çözümü şamasında iki yöntemden hangisinin seçileceği sorunu ortadan kalkar. Bulunan sonuçlar istatistiksel olarak anlamlıdır.

Keywords

Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri(MCDM), CRITIC, ENTROPY, ARAS, MOOSRA

A COMPARISON OF PERFORMANCE RESULTS OF ARAS AND MOOSRA METHODS: AMERICAN CONTINENT COUNTRIES

Abstract

Purpose- The main aim of the study is to compare ARAS and MOOSRA performance results. For this, 2020 macroeconomic data of 31 countries in the Americas were used.
Methodology- In the study, CRITIC and ENTOPY methods were applied as weighting criteria with ARAS and MOOSRA methods.
Findings- Three important results were obtained from the application phase. First, the ARAS method with CRITIC and ENTOPY weighting criteria gives very close results in performance ranking. Therefore, in a study using ARAS method, there is no problem of selection between weighting criteria. Second, the MOOSRA method with CRITIC and ENTOPY weighting criteria gives very close results in performance ranking. Therefore, in a study using the MOOSRA method, there is no selection problem between the weighting criteria. Thirdly, ARAS and MOOSRA methods are very close to each other, performance ranking results.
Conclusion- Accordingly, the question of which of the two methods to choose in eliminating the multi-criteria decision making problem is eliminated. The results found are statistically significant.

Keywords

Multicriteria decision-making (MCDM), CRITIC, ENTROPY, ARAS, MOOSRA

References

• Adalı, E. A., & Işık, A. T. (2017). The Multi-Objective Decision Making Methods Based on MULTIMOORA and MOOSRA for the Laptop Selection Problem. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 13(2), 229-237. DOI 10.1007/s40092-016-0175-5
• Dadelo, S., Turskis, Z., Zavadskas, E. K., & Dadeliene, R. (2012). Multiple Criteria Assessment of Elite Security Personal on the Basis of ARAS and Expert Methods. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 46(4), 65-88.
• Dahooie, J. H., Zavadskas, E. K., Abolhasani, M., Vanaki, A., & Turskis, Z. (2018). A Novel Approach for Evaluation of Projects Using an Interval–Valued Fuzzy Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method: A Case Study of Oil and Gas Well Drilling Projects. Symmetry, 10(2), 45. DOI:10.3390/sym10020045
• Jagadish & Ray, A. (2014). Green Cutting Fluid Selection Using MOOSRA Method. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology. 3(3), 559-563.
• Karabašević, D., Paunkovic, J., & Stanujkić, D. (2016). Ranking of Companies According to the Indicators of Corporate Social Responsibility Based on SWARA and ARAS Methods. Serbian Journal of Management, 11(1), 43-53. DOI:10.5937/sjm11-7877
• Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Lazauskas, M. (2013). Assessment of Priority Options for Preservation of Historic City Centre Buildings Using MCDM (ARAS). Procedia Engineering, 57, 657-661. DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2013.04.083
• Kutut, V., Zavadskas, E. K., & Lazauskas, M. (2014). Assessment of Priority Alternatives for Preservation of Historic Buildings Using Model Based on ARAS and AHP Methods. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 14(2), 287-294. DOI.org/10.1016/j.acme.2013.10.007
• Reza, S., & Majid, A. (2013). Ranking Financial Institutions Based on of Trust in online Banking Using ARAS and ANP Method. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 6(4), 415-423.
• Sarkar, A., Panja, S. C., Das, D., & Sarkar, B. (2015). Developing an Efficient Decision Support System for Non-Traditional Machine Selection: An Application of MOORA and MOOSRA. Production & Manufacturing Research, 3(1), 324-342. DOI.org/10.1080/21693277.2014.895688
• Stanujkic, D. (2015). Extension of the ARAS Method for Decision-Making Problems with Interval-Valued Triangular Fuzzy Numbers. Informatica, 26(2), 335-355. DOI.org/10.15388/Informatica.2015.51
• Stanujkic, D., & Jovanovic, R. (2012). Measuring a Quality of Faculty Website Using ARAS Method. In Proceeding of the International Scientific Conference Contemporary Issues in Business, Management and Education (pp. 545-554). DOI.10.3846/cibme.2012.45
• Turskis, Z., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010a). A Novel Method for Multiple Criteria Analysis: Grey Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS-G) method. Informatica, 21(4), 597-610.
• Turskis, Z., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2010b). A New Fuzzy Additive Ratio Assessment Method (ARAS‐F). Case Study: The Analysis of Fuzzy Multiple Criteria in order to Select the Logistic Senters Location. Transport, 25(4), 423-432. DOI.org/10.3846/transport.2010.52
• Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2010a). april A New Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method in Multicriteria Decision‐Making. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 16(2), 159-172. DOI. 10.3846/tede.2010.10
• Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Vilutiene, T. (2010b). Multiple Criteria Analysis of Foundation Instalment Alternatives by Applying Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) Method. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 10(3), 123-141