An improved method for ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis

AbstractScoring rules are an important disputable subject in data envelopment analysis (DEA). Various organizations use voting systems whose main object is to rank alternatives. In these methods, the ranks of alternatives are obtained by their associated weights. The method for determining the ranks of alternatives by their weights is an important issue. This problem has been the subject at hand of some authors. We suggest a three-stage method for the ranking of alternatives. In the first stage, the rank position of each alternative is computed based on the best and worst weights in the optimistic and pessimistic cases, respectively. The vector of weights obtained in the first stage is not a singleton. Hence, to deal with this problem, a secondary goal is used in the second stage. In the third stage of our method, the ranks of the alternatives approach the optimistic or pessimistic case. It is mentionable that the model proposed in the third stage is a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) model and there are several methods for solving it; we use the weighted sum method in this paper. The model is solved by mixed integer programming. Also, we obtain an interval for the rank of each alternative. We present two models on the basis of the average of ranks in the optimistic and pessimistic cases. The aim of these models is to compute the rank by common weights