Effect of Different MCDM Techniques and Weighting Mechanisms on Women Vulnerability Index
Keywords:
MCDM, TOPSIS, MABAC, VIKOR, CRITIC, GINI WeightsAbstract
Crime against women is a chronic issue that saddens society and needs to be carefully addressed. The states of India exhibit significant variations in the incidence of criminal behavior. We created a novel index in our previous research to determine how vulnerable Indian women are to crimes in various Indian states and union territories. The Women Vulnerability Index (WVI) assessed women's vulnerability to crime across all regions of the country. A set of alternatives is ranked using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) procedures based on a range of criteria or objectives. There are different MCDM techniques available to choose from. Also, many weighting schemes exist to assign relative importance or weight to the indicators. The task of selecting the MCDM technique for one's application is a big challenge. A bigger challenge is to select the appropriate weighting mechanism as well. This study's primary goal is to evaluate the viability and efficacy of several MCDM approaches in conjunction with various weighting systems in order to identify the Indian state with the greatest rate of crime against women. We apply different MCDM techniques on crime data to compute WVI. Also, we see the effect of using six different methods to assign weights to the factors on the values of WVI. MCDM methods are very popular these days and are being used in a lot of domains for decision making applications. Our paper will guide all such stakeholders and researchers to choose an appropriate MCDM technique and weighting method for their applications.
Downloads
References
Women Vulnerability Index (WVI): Multi Criteria Decision Making Approach. Aggarwal, G, Bansal, M and Aggarwal, S. 21s, 2024, International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, Vol. 12, pp. 1232–1238.
Statistical and analytical comparison of multi-criteria decision-making techniques under fuzzy environment. Hamed, Z, S, et al. 2016, Operations Research Perspectives, Vol. 3(c), pp. 92-117.
Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods Using The Same Data Standardization Method. Tien, D, Trung, D and Thien, N, V. 2, 022, Strojnícky časopis - Journal of Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 72, pp. 57-72.
A comparative study on material selection of microelectromechanical systems electrostatic actuators using Ashby, VIKOR and TOPSIS. Yazdani, M and Payam, A, F. 2015, Materials & Design, Vol. 65, pp. 328-334.
A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods. Ceballos, B, Lamata, M, T and Pelta, D, A. 2016, Progress in Artificial Intelligence.
The Impact of Aggregating Benefit and Cost Criteria in Four MCDA Methods. Triantaphyllou, E and Baig, K. 2, 2005, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 52, pp. 213-226.
A Review of Multiple Criteria Analysis for Water Resource Planning and Management. Hajkowicz, S and Collins, K. 2007, Water Resources Management, Vol. 21, pp. 1553-1566.
Ballestero, E and Romero, C. Multiple criteria decision making and its applications to economic problems. Netherlands : Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.
Laaribi, A. SIG et analyse multicritère. Paris : Hermès Science Publications, 2000.
Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Hwang, CL and Yoon, K. 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.
Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Eng. Sys. Opricovic, S. 1998, Faculty of Civil Engineering.
Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Opricovic, S and Tzeng, G, H. 2, 2004, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 156, pp. 445-455.
The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using Multi-Attributive Border Approximation area Comparison (MABAC). Pamučar, D and Ćirović, G. 6, 2015, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 42, pp. 3016-3028.
A new combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) method for multi-criteria decision-making. Ghorabaee, M, K, et al. 3, 2016, Econ. Comput. Econ. Cybern. Stud. Res., Vol. 50, pp. 25-44.
New hybrid multi-criteria decision-making DEMATEL -MAIRCA model: sustainable selection of a location for the development of multimodal logistics centre. Pamuca, D, S, Tarle, S, P and Parezanovi, T. 1, 2018, Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja , Vol. 31, pp. 1641-1665.
Review on multi-criteria decision aid in sustainable energy decision-making. Wang, J. J, et al. 2009, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 3, pp. 2263-2278.
A framework for weighting of criteria in ranking stage of material selection process. Jahan, A and al., et. 1-4, 2012, International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 58, pp. 411-420.
Prediction and entropy of printed English. Shannon, C, E. 1951, Bell system technical journal, pp. 50-64.
Road safety risk evaluation by means of improved entropy TOPSIS–RSR. Chen, F, Wang, J and Deng, Y. 2015, Saf Sci, Vol. 79, pp. 39-54.
Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The CRITIC method. Diakoulaki, D, Mavrotas, G and Lefteris, P. 7, 1995, Comp. Operate. Res, Vol. 22, pp. 763-770.
A new angular method to determine the objective weights. Shuai, D, et al. 2012. 24th Chinese control and decision conference (CCDC).
Aytekin, A. The distances and references-based solution approach for multi-criteria decision problems. s.l. : PhD thesis, Anadolu University, Graduatc School of Social Sciences, 2020.
A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach. Enrique, B, Perez-Gladish, B and Garcia-Bernabeu, A. 2015, International Series in Operations Research and Management Science.
Comparative Analysis of Multicriteria Decision Making Methods for Postgraduate Student Selection. Altunok, T, et al. 2010, Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, pp. 1-15.
Towards Objectification of Multi-Criteria Assessments: A Comparative Study on MCDA Methods. Bączkiewicz, A., et al. 2021. Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Seema Aggarwal, Geeta Aggarwal, Manisha Bansal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal unless they receive approval for doing so from the Editor-In-Chief.
IJISAE open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. This license lets the audience to give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made and if they remix, transform, or build upon the material, they must distribute contributions under the same license as the original.
