A Comprehensive Review of the Novel Weighting Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
Loading...
Date
2023
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
MDPI
Open Access Color
GOLD
Green Open Access
No
OpenAIRE Downloads
OpenAIRE Views
Publicly Funded
No
Abstract
In the realm of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems, the selection of a weighting method holds a critical role. Researchers from diverse fields have consistently employed MCDM techniques, utilizing both traditional and novel methods to enhance the discipline. Acknowledging the significance of staying abreast of such methodological developments, this study endeavors to contribute to the field through a comprehensive review of several novel weighting-based methods: CILOS, IDOCRIW, FUCOM, LBWA, SAPEVO-M, and MEREC. Each method is scrutinized in terms of its characteristics and steps while also drawing upon publications extracted from the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases. Through bibliometric and content analyses, this study delves into the trend, research components (sources, authors, countries, and affiliations), application areas, fuzzy implementations, hybrid studies (use of other weighting and/or ranking methods), and application tools for these methods. The findings of this review offer an insightful portrayal of the applications of each novel weighting method, thereby contributing valuable knowledge for researchers and practitioners within the field of MCDM.
Description
Keywords
Merec, Cilos, Fucom, Sapevo-m, Swara, Model, Mcdm, Weighting methods, Selection, Idocriw, Marcos, Criteria, Lbwa, Extension, CILOS, IDOCRIW, weighting methods, FUCOM, Information technology, LBWA, T58.5-58.64, MCDM
Turkish CoHE Thesis Center URL
Fields of Science
0202 electrical engineering, electronic engineering, information engineering, 02 engineering and technology, 01 natural sciences, 0105 earth and related environmental sciences
Citation
Ayan, B., Abacıoğlu, S., & Basilio, M. P. (2023). A Comprehensive Review of the Novel Weighting Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision-Making. Information, 14(5), 285.
WoS Q
Q2
Scopus Q
Q2

OpenCitations Citation Count
88
Source
Information
Volume
14
Issue
5
Start Page
285
End Page
PlumX Metrics
Citations
CrossRef : 23
Scopus : 164
Captures
Mendeley Readers : 248
SCOPUS™ Citations
165
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Web of Science™ Citations
136
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Page Views
382
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Downloads
8786
checked on Feb 03, 2026
Google Scholar™


