Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis for Selecting and Evaluating Fighter Aircraft

Authors: C. Ardil, A. M. Pashaev, R.A. Sadiqov, P. Abdullayev

Abstract:

In this paper, multiple criteria decision making analysis technique, is presented for ranking and selection of a set of determined alternatives - fighter aircraft - which are associated with a set of decision factors. In fighter aircraft design, conflicting decision criteria, disciplines, and technologies are always involved in the design process. Multiple criteria decision making analysis techniques can be helpful to effectively deal with such situations and make wise design decisions. Multiple criteria decision making analysis theory is a systematic mathematical approach for dealing with problems which contain uncertainties in decision making. The feasibility and contributions of applying the multiple criteria decision making analysis technique in fighter aircraft selection analysis is explored. In this study, an integrated framework incorporating multiple criteria decision making analysis technique in fighter aircraft analysis is established using entropy objective weighting method. An improved integrated multiple criteria decision making analysis method is utilized to aggregate the multiple decision criteria into one composite figure of merit, which serves as an objective function in the decision process. Therefore, it is demonstrated that the suitable multiple criteria decision making analysis method with decision solution provides an effective objective function for the decision making analysis. Considering that the inherent uncertainties and the weighting factors have crucial decision impacts on the fighter aircraft evaluation, seven fighter aircraft models for the multiple design criteria in terms of the weighting factors are constructed. The proposed multiple criteria decision making analysis model is based on integrated entropy index procedure, and additive multiple criteria decision making analysis theory. Hence, the applicability of proposed technique for fighter aircraft selection problem is considered. The constructed multiple criteria decision making analysis model can provide efficient decision analysis approach for uncertainty assessment of the decision problem. Consequently, the fighter aircraft alternatives are ranked based their final evaluation scores, and sensitivity analysis is conducted.

Keywords: Fighter Aircraft, Fighter Aircraft Selection, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis, MCDMA

References:

[1] Accessed in March 2019, https://www.uacrussia.ru/en/
[2] Agrawal, V.P., Kohli, V., Gupta, S., (1991) Computer aided robot selection: The multiple attribute decision making approach. International Journal of Production Research, 29(8), 1629-1644.
[3] Ali, M.I., Feng, F., Liu, X., Min, W.K. Shabir, M., (2009) On some new operations in soft set theory, Comput. Math. Appl., 57, 1547-1553.
[4] Atanassov, K. (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20, 87-96.
[5] Belenson, S.M., Kapur, K.C. (1973) An algorithm for solving multicriterion linear programming problems with examples, Operational Research Quarterly, 24(1), 65-77.
[6] Chen, M.F., Tzeng, G.H. (2004) Combining gray relation and TOPSIS concepts for selecting an expatriate host country, Mathematical and Computer Modelling 40, 1473-1490.
[7] Deng, H., Yeh, C.H., Willis, R. J. (2000) Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers and Operations Research, 27(10), 963-973.
[8] Feng, C.M., Wang, R-T. (2001) Considering the financial ratios on the performance evaluation of highway bus industry. Transport Reviews, 21(4), 449-467.
[9] Hwang, C.L., Yoon, K. (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
[10] Lai, Y.J., Hwang, C.L. (1994) Fuzzy Multiple Objective Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
[11] Lai, Y., Liu, T., Hwang, C. (1994) TOPSIS for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research, 76, 486-500.
[12] Chris Tofallis (2014) Add or Multiply? A Tutorial on Ranking and Choosing with Multiple Criteria. INFORMS Transactions on Education 14(3):109-119. https://doi.org/10.1287/ited.2013.0124
[13] Choo, E., Schoner, B., Wedley, W. (1999) Interpretation of criteria weights in multicriteria decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 37, 527-541.
[14] Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R.A.,Camarinha-Matos, L. (2018) Data normalisation techniques in decision making: case study with TOPSIS method. Int. J. Inf. Decis. Sci., 10, 19-38.
[15] Zavadskas, E., Turskis, Z. (2008) A New Logarithmic Normalization Method in Games Theory. Informatica, 19, 303-314.
[16] Janic, M. (2015) Multicriteria evaluation of high-speed rail, transrapid maglev, and air passenger transport in Europe, Transportation Planning and Technology 26(6), (2003) 491-512.
[17] Kahraman, C., Engin, O., Kabak, O., Kaya, I. (2009) Information systems outsourcing decisions using a group decision-making approach. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 22(6), 832-841.
[18] Kim, G., Park, C.S., Yoon, K.P. (1997) Identifying investment opportunities for advanced manufacturing systems with comparative-integrated performance measurement, International Journal of Production Economics 50, 23-33.
[19] Kwong, C.K. and Tam, S.M. (2002) Case-based reasoning approach to concurrent design of low power transformers, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 128, 136-141.
[20] Lai, Y.J., Liu, T.Y., Hwang, C. L. (1994) TOPSIS for MODM. European Journal of Operational Research, 76(3), 486-500.
[21] Maji, P.K., Biswas, R. Roy, A.R. (2003) Soft set theory, Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 45, 555-562.
[22] Milani, A.S., Shanian, A., Madoliat, R. (2005) The effect of normalization norms in multiple attribute decision making models: A case study in gear material selection, Structural Multidisciplinary Optimization 29(4), 312-318.
[23] Opricovic, S., Tzeng, G.H. (2004) Compromise Solution by MCDM Methods: A Comparative Analysis Of VIKOR and TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research, C: CLVI, 445-455.
[24] Parkan, C., Wu, M.L. (1999) Decision-making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 36(3), 503-523.
[25] Rao, R.V. (2008) Evaluation of environmentally conscious manufacturing programs using multiple attribute decision-making methods, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers-Part B-Engineering Manufacture, 222(3), 441-451.
[26] Ren, L., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Sun, Z. (2007) Comparative analysis of a novel MTOPSIS method and TOPSIS. Applied Mathematics Research Express, 10. doi:10.1093/amrx/abm005. Article ID abm005
[27] Shyura, H.J., Shih, H.S. (2006) A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 44(7-8), 749-761.
[28] Srdjevic, B., Medeiros, Y.D.P., Faria, A.S. (2004) An objective multi-criteria evaluation of water management scenarios, Water Resources Management 18, 35-54.
[29] Stern, Z.S., Mehrez, A., Hadad, Y. (2000) An AHP/DEA methodology for ranking decision making units, Intl. Trans. In Op. Res., 7, 109-124.
[30] Triantaphyllou, E., (2000) Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, 139-140.
[31] Yang, T., Chou, P. (2005) Solving a multiresponse simulation-optimization problem with discrete variables using a multi-attribute decision-making method, Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 68, 9-21.
[32] Yoon, K., Hwang, C.L. (1985) Manufacturing plant location analysis by multiple attribute decision making: Part I-single-plant strategy, International Journal of Production Research 23, 345-359.
[33] Yoon, K.P., Hwang, C.L. (1995). Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction, Sage Pub., Thousand Oaks, CA,
[34] Zeleny, M. (1974) A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Computers and Operations Research, 1(3-4), 479-496.
[35] Velasquez, M., Hester, P. T. (2013) An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods. International Journal of Operations Research Vol. 10, No. 2, p.56-66.
[36] Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., Nor, K. MD., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., Valipour, V. (2015) Multiple criteria decision-making techniques and their applications – a review of the literature from 2000 to 2014. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 28:1, p. 516-571.
[37] Mardani, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Khalifah, Z., Jusoh, A., Nor, K. MD. (2016) Multiple criteria decision-making techniques in transportation systems: a systematic review of the state of the art literature, Transport, 31:3, p.359-385.
[38] Yager, R. (2004) Decision making using minimization of regret. Int. J. Approx. Reason., 36, 109-128.
[39] Ardil, C., Bilgen, S. (2017) Online Performance Tracking. SocioEconomic Challenges, 1(3), 58-72.
[40] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Performance Tracking. International Journal of Computer and Systems Engineering, Vol:12, No:5,320-349
[41] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Compromise Optimization for Development Ranking of the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries and Turkey. International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Sciences Vol:12, No:6, 131-138.
[42] Ardil, C. (2018) Multidimensional Compromise Programming Evaluation of Digital Commerce Websites. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering Vol:12, No:7, 556-563.
[43] Ardil, C. (2018) Multicriteria Decision Analysis for Development Ranking of Balkan Countries. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering Vol:12, No:12, 1118-1125.
[44] Ardil, C. (2019) Scholar Index for Research Performance Evaluation Using Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, Vol:13, No:2, 93-105.
[45] Ardil, C. (2019) Military Fighter Aircraft Selection Using Multiplicative Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis Method. International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, 13(9), 184 - 193.
[46] Ardil, C. (2019) Fighter Aircraft Selection Using Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution with Multiple Criteria Decision Making Analysis. International Journal of Transport and Vehicle Engineering, Vol:13, No:10, 649-657.
[47] Wang Tien-Chin, Chang Tsung-Han (2007) Application of TOPSIS in evaluating initial training aircraft under a fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 33, 870–880.
[48] Sánchez-Lozano, J.M., Serna, J., Dolón-Payán, A. (2015) Evaluating military training aircrafts through the combination of multi-criteria decision making processes with fuzzy logic. A case study in the Spanish Air Force Academy. Aerospace Science and Technology, 42, 58-65.
[49] Ali, Y., Muhammad, N., Salman, A. (2017) Selection of a fighter aircraft to improve the effectiveness of air combat in the war on terror: Pakistan air force - a case in point. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i2.489