Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Intelligent Decision Technologies

IDT 2017: Intelligent Decision Technologies pp 549–561Cite as

Comparison of Classical Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods with Fuzzy Rule-Based Methods on the Example of Investment Projects Evaluation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies ((SIST,volume 39))

Abstract

In the process of investment decision making, next to financial indicators many other aspects of investment projects are increasingly often considered. This leads to the multi-criteria evaluation of a project. In the work one compared results of multi-criteria evaluation of the investment projects realized by using TOPSIS and AHP methods with results obtained at the use of rule-based methods, especially fuzzy reasoning techniques. To comparisons were used chosen investments in the metallurgical industry. The work finish conclusions defined on the basis carried out calculations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Enea, M., Piazza, T.: Project selection by constrained fuzzy AHP. Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Mak. 3, 39–62 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Tarimcilar, M.M., Khaksari, S.Z.: Capital budgeting in hospital management using the analytic hierarchy process. Socioecon. Plann. Sci. 25, 27–34 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Olson, D.L.: Decision Aids for Selection Problems. Springer Verlag, New York (1996)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Souder, W.: Project Selection and Economic Appraisal. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Van Laarhoven, P.J.M., Pedrycz, W.: A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory, Fuzzy Sets and Syst. 11, 229–241 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chan, F.T.S., Chan, M.H., Tang, N.K.H.: Evaluation methodologies for technology selection. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 107, 330–337 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wand, T.: Fuzzy discounted cash flow analysis. In: Karwowski W., Wilhelm, M. R. (eds.) Applications of Fuzzy Sets Methodologies in Industrial Engineering, pp. 91–102 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Liu, P., Zhang, X., Liu, W.: A risk evaluation method for the high-tech project investment based on uncertain linguistic variables. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 78, 40–50 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rebiasz, B., Gawel, B., Skalna, I.: Fuzzy multi-attribute evaluation of investments. In: 2013 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS), pp. 977–980 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Iancu, I.: Reasoning system with fuzzy uncertainty. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 92(1), 51–59 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mamdani, E.H., Assilian, S.: An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 7, 1–13 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sugeno, M.: Industrial Applications of Fuzzy Control. Elsevier science Publisher, Amsterdam (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Amindoust, A., Ahmed, S., Saghafinia, A., Bahreininejad, A.: Sustainable supplier selection: A ranking model based on fuzzy inference system, Appl. soft Comput. 12(6), 1668–1667 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Medina, S., Moreno, J.: Risk evaluation in Colombian electricity market using fuzzy logic. Energy Econ. 29, 999–1009 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaur, A., Kaur, A.: Comparison of Mamdani-type and Sugeno-type fuzzy inference systems for air conditioning system. Int. J. Soft Comput. Eng. 2, 323–325 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Yang, J.B., Liu, J., Wang, J., Sii, H.S., Wang, H.W.: Belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning approach—RIMER. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man, Cybern. Part A Syst. Humans. 36, 266–285 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mock, T.J., Sun, L., Srivastava, R.P., Vasarhelyi, M.: An evidential reasoning approach to Sarbanes-Oxley mandated internal control risk assessment. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 10, 65–78 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rębiasz, B., Macioł, A.: Hybrid data in the multiobjective evaluation of investments. Procedia Comput. Sci. 35, 624–633 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chang, D.-Y.: Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 95(3), 649–655 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Saghafian, S., Hejazi, S.R.: Multi-criteria Group Decision Making Using A Modified Fuzzy TOPSIS Procedure. Int. Conf. Comput. Intell. Model. Control Autom. Int. Conf. Intell. Agents, Web Technol. Internet Commer. 2 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, Kraków, Poland

    Bogdan Rębiasz & Andrzej Macioł

Authors
  1. Bogdan Rębiasz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrzej Macioł
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bogdan Rębiasz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. FCT, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal

    Rui Neves-Silva

  2. Faculty of Education, Science, Technology and Mathematics, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia

    Lakhmi C. Jain

  3. KES International, Shoreham-by-sea, United Kingdom

    Robert J. Howlett

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Rębiasz, B., Macioł, A. (2015). Comparison of Classical Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods with Fuzzy Rule-Based Methods on the Example of Investment Projects Evaluation. In: Neves-Silva, R., Jain, L., Howlett, R. (eds) Intelligent Decision Technologies. IDT 2017. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 39. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19857-6_47

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19857-6_47

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19856-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19857-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation