Fuzzy Interval-Valued Multi Criteria Based Decision Making for Ranking Features in Multi-Modal 3D Face Recognition

Soodamani Ramalingam, 'Fuzzy interval-valued multi criteria based decision making for ranking features in multi-modal 3D face recognition', Fuzzy Sets and Systems, In Press version available online 13 June 2017. This is an Open Access paper, made available under the Creative Commons license CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This paper describes an application of multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) for multi-modal fusion of features in a 3D face recognition system. A decision making process is outlined that is based on the performance of multi-modal features in a face recognition task involving a set of 3D face databases. In particular, the fuzzy interval valued MCDM technique called TOPSIS is applied for ranking and deciding on the best choice of multi-modal features at the decision stage. It provides a formal mechanism of benchmarking their performances against a set of criteria. The technique demonstrates its ability in scaling up the multi-modal features.Peer reviewedProo

A comparative study of multiple-criteria decision-making methods under stochastic inputs

This paper presents an application and extension of multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to account for stochastic input variables. More in particular, a comparative study is carried out among well-known and widely-applied methods in MCDM, when applied to the reference problem of the selection of wind turbine support structures for a given deployment location. Along with data from industrial experts, six deterministic MCDM methods are studied, so as to determine the best alternative among the available options, assessed against selected criteria with a view toward assigning confidence levels to each option. Following an overview of the literature around MCDM problems, the best practice implementation of each method is presented aiming to assist stakeholders and decision-makers to support decisions in real-world applications, where many and often conflicting criteria are present within uncertain environments. The outcomes of this research highlight that more sophisticated methods, such as technique for the order of preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) and Preference Ranking Organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE), better predict the optimum design alternative

Multi-criteria decision making with linguistic labels: a comparison of two methodologies applied to energy planning

This paper compares two multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) approaches based on linguistic label assessment. The first approach consists of a modified fuzzy TOPSIS methodology introduced by Kaya and Kahraman in 2011. The second approach, introduced by Agell et al. in 2012, is based on qualitative reasoning techniques for ranking multi-attribute alternatives in group decision-making with linguistic labels. Both approaches are applied to a case of assessment and selection of the most suitable types of energy in a geographical area.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Open source environment to define constraints in route planning for GIS-T

Route planning for transportation systems is strongly related to shortest path algorithms, an optimization problem extensively studied in the literature. To find the shortest path in a network one usually assigns weights to each branch to represent the difficulty of taking such branch. The weights construct a linear preference function ordering the variety of alternatives from the most to the least attractive.Postprint (published version

Developing A Group Decision Support System (gdss) For Decision Making Under Uncertainty

Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problems are often associated with tradeoffs between performances of the available alternative solutions under decision making criteria. These problems become more complex when performances are associated with uncertainty. This study proposes a stochastic MCDM procedure that can handle uncertainty in MCDM problems. The proposed method coverts a stochastic MCDM problem into many deterministic ones through a Monte-Carlo (MC) selection. Each deterministic problem is then solved using a range of MCDM methods and the ranking order of the alternatives is established for each deterministic MCDM. The final ranking of the alternatives can be determined based on winning probabilities and ranking distribution of the alternatives. Ranking probability distributions can help the decision-maker understand the risk associated with the overall ranking of the options. Therefore, the final selection of the best alternative can be affected by the risk tolerance of the decisionmakers. A Group Decision Support System (GDSS) is developed here with a user-friendly interface to facilitate the application of the proposed MC-MCDM approach in real-world multiparticipant decision making for an average user. The GDSS uses a range of decision making methods to increase the robustness of the decision analysis outputs and to help understand the sensitivity of the results to level of cooperation among the decision-makers. The decision analysis methods included in the GDSS are: 1) conventional MCDM methods (Maximin, Lexicographic, TOPSIS, SAW and Dominance), appropriate when there is a high cooperation level among the decision-makers; 2) social choice rules or voting methods (Condorcet Choice, Borda scoring, Plurality, Anti-Plurality, Median Voting, Hare System of voting, Majoritarian iii Compromise ,and Condorcet Practical), appropriate for cases with medium cooperation level among the decision-makers; and 3) Fallback Bargaining methods (Unanimity, Q-Approval and Fallback Bargaining with Impasse), appropriate for cases with non-cooperative decision-makers. To underline the utility of the proposed method and the developed GDSS in providing valuable insights into real-world hydro-environmental group decision making, the GDSS is applied to a benchmark example, namely the California‘s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta decision making problem. The implications of GDSS‘ outputs (winning probabilities and ranking distributions) are discussed. Findings are compared with those of previous studies, which used other methods to solve this problem, to highlight the sensitivity of the results to the choice of decision analysis methods and/or different cooperation levels among the decision-maker

Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Method Selection And Application To Three Contrasting Agricultural Case Studies

Agribusiness, farm business and agricultural-environmental decisions which varied in their characteristics were used to evaluate multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) in an agricultural context. This paper discusses differences between the case studies, strengths and weaknesses of the methods used, and the success of the MCDM process based on participants’ expectations and experiences. While MCDM can help identify the best decision, the main benefits identified in using MCDM included better understanding of their own and other’s perspectives, a means to explain the decision and a structured way to work through the decision process. Key problem areas identified included time limitations, understanding and ownership.Multiple criteria decision making, agriculture, decision making, Agribusiness, Agricultural Finance, Consumer/Household Economics, Crop Production/Industries, Environmental Economics and Policy, Farm Management, Land Economics/Use,

Uncertainty analysis methods to select the optimal alternative in the design of parking facilities

The selection of the preferred alternative in a parking facility project is usually made in a state of uncertainty. Decision-making methods are a useful tool to systematically arrive at a final decision between different alternatives and reduce subjectivity in decision making by creating a series of filters. However, the selection of the appropriate variables to be considered in the analysis may be problematic as well. Performing sensitivity analyses on entry variables is a key feature to ensure that the final choice is stable when initial conditions experience changes. This paper suggests a methodology to select the best alternative when considering parking facilities. The methodology compares the results from two different sensitivity analyses techniques. The changes in preference experienced as the applied weights change through the process are analyzed and the most critical criteria are identified