A Rough Hybrid Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Improving the Quality of a Research Information System
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Statistical Methods for the D&M Model
2.2. MCDM Models
2.3. Research Gaps
3. Methodology
3.1. The Rough Number
- Step 1: Conform lower and upper approximations of rough number for each crisp scale.
- Step 2: Compute the interval value of the rough number.
- Step 3: Drive operations for two rough numbers.
- Step 4: Transfer into crisp value from rough interval value. When needing to compare analysis for criteria or alternatives ranking, the de-roughness of the rough number into a crisp value can be used by:
3.2. The RDANP Method
- Step 1: Build a rough original influence relationship matrix on a measuring scale of 0–4 ranging from “no influence (0)” to “very high influential (4)”.
- Step 2: Obtain the rough initial influence relationship matrix = []nxn, which is the multiplication of and v.
- Step 3: Calculate the rough total influence relationship matrix with Equation (11). The element indicates the rough interdependent effects that criteria i has on criteria j, where I is an identity matrix.
- Step 4: Derive each column sum () and row sum () from the rough total influence relationship matrix as follows:
- Step 5: Get the RINRM for whole evaluation model.
- Step 6: Derive rough total influence relationship matrix based on the criteria and based on the dimensions.
- Step 7: Obtain the rough unweighted supermatrix.
- Step 8: Derive the rough weighted supermatrix.
- Step 9: Obtain the rough influential weights.
3.3. The COPRAS-R Method with Aspiration Level
- Step 1: Build a rough decision matrix.
- Step 2: Obtain an aspirated rough decision matrix.
- Step 3: Calculate the rough proximity degree of gray relation.
- Step 4: Integrate the aspirated proximity index.
- Step 5: Calculate the utility ratio for each alternative.
4. Case Study
4.1. Identification Dimensions and Criteria for Evaluation of a Research Information System
4.2. Measuring the Relationship between Dimensions and Criteria by RDANP Method
4.3. Obtaining the Weights of Each Dimension and Criterion
4.4. Evaluating and Improving School Information System Using the COPRAS-R Method
4.5. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Criterion | No. 1 | No. 2 | No. 3 | No. 4 | No. 5 | No. 6 | No. 7 | No. 8 | No. 9 | No. 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11–C11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
C11–C12 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
C11–C13 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 |
C11–C14 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
C11–C21 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
C11–C22 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
C11–C23 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
C11–C24 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
C11–C31 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
C11–C32 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
C11–C33 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
C11–C41 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
C11–C42 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
C11–C43 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
C11–C44 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
References
- Perc, M. Growth and structure of Slovenia’s scientific collaboration network. J. Informetr. 2010, 4, 475–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perc, M. Zip’s law and log-normal distribution in measures of sicentific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of years of Slovenia’s research as an example. J. Informetr. 2010, 4, 358–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lužar, B.; Levnajić, Z.; Povh, J.; Perc, M. Community structure and the evolution of interdisciplinarity in Slovenia’s scientific collaboration network. PLoS ONE 2014, 4, e94429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Helbing, D.; Brockmann, D.; Chadefaux, T.; Donnay, K.; Blanke, U.; Woolley-Meza, O.; Moussaid, M.; Johansson, A.; Krause, J.; Schutte, S.; et al. Saving Human Lives: What Complexity Science and Information Systems can Contribute. J. Stat. Phys. 2015, 158, 735–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- DeLone, W.H.; McLean, E.R. Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Inf. Syst. Res. 1992, 3, 60–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeLone, W.H.; McLean, E.R. The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2003, 19, 9–30. [Google Scholar]
- Pitt, L.F.; Watson, R.T.; Kavan, C.B. Service quality: A measure of information systems effectiveness. MIS Q. 1995, 19, 173–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seddon, P.B.; Staples, S.; Patnayakuni, R.; Bowtell, M. Dimensions of information systems success. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 1999, 2, 2966–2976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yeo, H.J. Information System Success Disparity between Developer and Users. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2016, 9, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, Y.M.; Zhao, K.X.; Stylianou, A. The impacts of information quality and system quality on users’ continuance intention in information-exchange virtual communities: An empirical investigation. Decis. Support Syst. 2013, 56, 513–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azeroual, O.; Saake, G.; Schallehn, E. Analyzing data quality issues in research information systems via data profiling. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 41, 50–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Wastell, D.; Laumer, S.; Henriksen, H.Z.D.; Myers, M.; Bunker, D. Research on information systems failures and successes: Status update and future directions. Inf. Syst. Front. 2014, 17, 143–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grudzień, Ł.; Hamrol, A. Information quality in design process docunment of quality management systems. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 36, 599–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.F. An application of fuzzy AHP for evaluating course website quality. Comput. Educ. 2010, 54, 877–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, C.C.; Lee, Y.S. Exploring the Critical Factors Influencing the Quality of Blog Interfaces Using the Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory DEMATEL Method. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2014, 33, 84–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, W.H.; Chou, W.C.; Leu, J.D. An effectiveness evaluation model for the web-based marketing of airline industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 15499–15516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, H.S.; Tzeng, G.H.; Hu, S.K. Cloud e-learning service strategies for improving e-learning innovation performance in a fuzzy environment by using a new hybrid fuzzy multiple attribute decision-making model. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2015, 24, 812–1835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayyash, M.M. Scrutiny of Relationship between E-Banking Information Quality Dimensions and Customer Satisfaction. J. Comput. Sci. 2017, 13, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Molla, A.; Licker, P.S. E-commerce systems success: An attempt to extend and respecify the Delone and McLean model of IS Success. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2001, 2, 131–141. [Google Scholar]
- Bernroider, E.W.N. IT governance for enterprise resource planning supported by the DeLone-McLean model of information systems success. Inf. Manag. 2008, 45, 257–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.Y.; Chang, R.E.; Hung, M.C.; Lin, M.H. Assessing the quality of a Web-based Learning System for Nurses. J. Med. Syst. 2009, 33, 317–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bossen, C.; Jensen, L.G.; Udsen, F.W. Evaluation of a comprehensive EHR based on the DeLone and McLean model for IS success: Approach, results, and success factors. J. Med. Syst. 2013, 82, 940–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kyoung, W.C.; Sung, K.B.; Ji, H.R.; Kyeong, N.K.; Chang, H.A.; Yong, M.C. Performance Evaluation of Public Hospital Information Systems by the Information System Success Model. Health Inf. Res. 2015, 21, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [Green Version]
- Chiu, P.S.; Chao, I.; Kao, C.C.; Pu, Y.H.; Huang, Y.M. Implementation and evaluation of mobile e-books in a cloud bookcase using the information system sucess model. Libr. Hi Tech 2016, 34, 207–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, M.; Shao, Z.; Liu, Q.; Liu, C.Y. Understanding the quality factors that influence the continuance intention of students toward articipation in MOOCs. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2017, 65, 1195–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.H.; Wang, Y.S.; Li, C.R.; Shih, S.J.; Lin, S.J. The Measurement and Dimensionality of Mobile Learning Systems Success: Two-Stage Development and Validation. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2017, 55, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.H.; Chen, S.C. Understanding the relationships of critical factors to Facebook educational usage intention. Internet Res. 2015, 25, 262–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.S. Assessing e-commerce systems success: A respecification and validation of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Inf. Syst. J. 2008, 18, 529–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sebetci, Ö.; Aksu, G. Evaluating e-government systems in Turkey: The case of the ‘e-movable system’. Inf. Polity 2014, 19, 225–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, X.L. Effectiveness of information technology in reducing corruption in China: A validation of the DeLone and McLean information systems success model. Electron. Libr. 2015, 33, 52–64. [Google Scholar]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Chiang, C.H.; Li, C.W. Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 2007, 32, 1028–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, W.H.; Chou, W.C. Selecting management systems for sustainable development in SMEs: A novel hybrid model based on DEMATEL, ANP, and ZOGP. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 1444–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liou, J.J.H.; Yen, L.; Tzeng, G.H. Building an effective safety management system for airlines. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2008, 14, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.K.; Chen, I.S. Using a novel conjunctive MCDM approach based on DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP, and TOPSIS as an innovation support system for Taiwanese higher education. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37, 1981–1990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, C.C. Identifying critical success factors in EDA industry using DEMATEL method. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 2015, 8, 208–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, C.C.; Liou, J.J.H.; Chuang, Y.C. Integrating DANP and modified grey relation theory for the selection of an outsourcing provider. Expert Syst. Appl. 2013, 40, 2297–2304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C.N.; Liou, J.J.H.; Chuang, Y.C. A method for exploring the interdependencies and importance of critical infrastructures. Knowl. Based. Syst. 2014, 55, 66–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liou, J.J.H. Building an effective system for carbon reduction management. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 103, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shao, Q.G.; Liou, J.J.H.; Weng, S.S.; Chuang, Y.C. Improving the Green Building Evaluation System in China Based on the DANP Method. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bai, C.G.; Sarkis, J. A grey-based DEMATEL model for evaluating business process management critical success factors. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2013, 146, 281–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, R.J. Using fuzzy DEMATEL to evaluate the green supply chain management practices. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 40, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Govindan, K.; Khodaverdi, R.; Vafadarnikjoo, A. Intuitionistic fuzzy based DEMATEL method for developing green practices and performances in a green supply chain. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 7202–7220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, W.Y.; Cao, J.T. A rough DEMATEL-based approach for evaluating interaction between requirements of product-service system. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2017, 110, 353–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pamučar, D.; Mihajlović, M.; Obradović, R.; Atanasković, P. Novel approach to group multi-criteria decision making based on interval rough numbers: Hybrid DEMATEL-ANP-MAIRCA model. Expert Syst. Appl. 2017, 88, 58–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pawlak, Z. Rough sets. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. 1982, 11, 341–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhai, L.Y.; Khoo, L.P.; Zhong, Z.W. A rough set enhanced fuzzy approach to quality function deployment. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2008, 37, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shyng, J.Y.; Shieh, H.M.; Tzeng, G.H.; Hsieh, S.H. Using FSBT technique with Rough Set Theory for personal investment portfolio analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2010, 201, 601–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, S.; Jin, X.N.; Li, J.X. An assessment method for the impact of missing data in the rough set-based decision fusion. Intell. Data Anal. 2016, 20, 1267–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liou, J.J.H.; Chuang, Y.C.; Hsu, C.C. Improving airline service quality based on rough set theory and flow graphs. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2016, 33, 1231–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiu, W.Y.; Tzeng, G.H.; Li, H.L. A new hybrid MCDM model combining DANP with VIKOR to improve e-store business. Knowl. Based. Syst. 2013, 37, 48–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, W.; Ming, X.; Liu, H.C. Identifying critical risk factors of sustainable supply chain management: A rough strength-relation analysis method. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 143, 100–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, K.Y.; Yan, M.R.; Tzeng, G.H. Combining VIKOR-DANP model for glamor stock selection and stock performance improvement. Knowl. Based. Syst. 2014, 58, 86–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zavadskas, E.K.; Kaklauskas, A.; Šarka, V. The new method of multicriteria complex proportional assesment projects. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 1994, 1, 131–139. [Google Scholar]
- Zavadskas, E.K.; Turskis, Z.; Tamosaitiene, J.; Marina, V. Multicriteria Selection of Project Managers by Applying Grey Criteria. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2008, 14, 462–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Podvezko, V. The comparative analysis of MCDA methods SAW and COPRAS. Eng. Econ. 2011, 22, 134–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zolfani, S.H.; Rezaeiniya, N.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Turskis, Z. Froset roads location based on AHP and COPRAS-G method: An emprical study based on Iran. E M Ekon. Manag. 2011, 14, 6–21. [Google Scholar]
- Liou, J.J.H.; Tamosaitiene, J.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Tzeng, G.H. New hybrid COPRAS-G MADM Model for improving and selecting suppliers in green supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2016, 54, 114–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chatterjee, K.; Pamucar, D.; Zavadskas, E.K. Evaluating the performance of suppliers based on using the R’AMATEL-MAIRCA method for green supply chain implementation in electronics industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 101–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, M.; Wu, L.F.; Li, B.; Li, Z.C. A novel hybrid multivariate nonlinear grey model for forecasting the traffic-related emissions. Appl. Math. Model. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dimension | Criteria | Description |
---|---|---|
System quality (C1) | Ease of use (C11) | Does not require excessive professional guidance |
Integration (C12) | System function integration level | |
Reliability (C13) | System robustness, few system crashes | |
Response time (C14) | The reaction time after users make a request to the system | |
Information quality (C2) | Accuracy (C21) | Accuracy of the information delivered by the system |
Completeness (C22) | Integrity of the information supplied by the system | |
Timelines (C23) | System information update speed | |
Usefulness (C24) | Value of the information produced by the system | |
Service quality (C3) | Assurance (C31) | Frequency and effect of enterprise maintenance system |
IS training (C32) | Effect of training scientific research personnel | |
Organization design (C33) | Service awareness and management improvement for system design | |
Intention to user (C4) | User frequency (C41) | Number of times the user uses the system |
Navigation patterns (C42) | How users access the system (computer or mobile phone) | |
Effectiveness (C43) | Does accessing the system help to improve job performance? | |
Efficiency (C44) | Does productivity increase after accessing the system? |
C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C21 | … | C44 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | [0.00, 0.00] | [2.40, 3.17] | [2.71, 3.64] | [2.94, 3.65] | [2.12, 3.27] | [2.81, 3.78] | |
C12 | [3.01, 3.19] | [0.00, 0.00] | [2.35, 3.06] | [2.48, 3.13] | [2.12, 3.27] | [3.25, 3.75] | |
C13 | [2.13, 2.85] | [2.33, 3.62] | [0.00, 0.00] | [2.83, 3.37] | [0.74, 2.13] | [3.25, 3.75] | |
C14 | [3.36, 3.84] | [2.47, 3.52] | [2.28, 3.48] | [0.00, 0.00] | [0.24, 0.98] | [2.75, 3.64] | |
C21 | [0.86, 2.34] | [1.07, 2.71] | [1.33, 2.60] | [0.57, 1.62] | [0.00, 0.00] | [3.02, 3.76] | |
C22 | [1.35, 2.68] | [1.59, 2.60] | [1.09, 2.46] | [0.38, 1.67] | [1.68, 3.42] | [2.87, 3.52] | |
C23 | [1.52, 2.73] | [1.35, 2.06] | [1.65, 2.60] | [1.41, 2.35] | [1.95, 3.42] | [3.13, 3.85] | |
C24 | [0.80, 2.23] | [2.12, 3.27] | [1.69, 2.51] | [0.78, 2.20] | [2.83, 3.75] | [3.16, 3.64] | |
C31 | [2.71, 3.64] | [1.31, 2.87] | [2.61, 3.18] | [1.81, 2.99] | [1.54, 3.23] | [1.66, 3.14] | |
C32 | [2.28, 3.48] | [1.12, 2.27] | [1.49, 2.31] | [0.52, 1.73] | [1.24, 2.32] | [2.36, 3.25] | |
C33 | [1.68, 3.42] | [1.75, 3.55] | [1.90, 3.42] | [1.68, 3.42] | [2.63, 3.36] | [2.00, 3.00] | |
C41 | [1.42, 2.72] | [1.49, 2.64] | [0.38, 1.67] | [0.75, 2.08] | [0.45, 2.25] | [2.24, 2.98] | |
C42 | [0.30, 1.32] | [0.25, 1.43] | [0.16, 1.11] | [0.58, 2.21] | [0.16, 1.32] | [1.28, 2.48] | |
C43 | [1.02, 2.19] | [1.40, 2.17] | [0.38, 1.67] | [0.54, 1.86] | [0.65, 1.94] | [2.75, 3.64] | |
C44 | [1.24, 1.98] | [1.49, 2.31] | [0.66, 2.14] | [0.86, 2.34] | [0.75, 2.08] | [0.00, 0.00] |
C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C21 | … | C44 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | [0.04, 0.24] | [0.08, 0.30] | [0.09, 0.29] | [0.09, 0.28] | [0.07, 0.29] | [0.11, 0.37] | |
C12 | [0.10, 0.29] | [0.04, 0.23] | [0.08, 0.27] | [0.08, 0.26] | [0.07, 0.28] | [0.12, 0.35] | |
C13 | [0.07, 0.27] | [0.08, 0.28] | [0.03, 0.20] | [0.08, 0.26] | [0.04, 0.24] | [0.11, 0.33] | |
C14 | [0.10, 0.27] | [0.08, 0.26] | [0.07, 0.25] | [0.03, 0.18] | [0.03, 0.21] | [0.10, 0.31] | |
C21 | [0.04, 0.25] | [0.05, 0.26] | [0.05, 0.24] | [0.03, 0.22] | [0.02, 0.20] | [0.10, 0.33] | |
C22 | [0.05, 0.26] | [0.06, 0.25] | [0.04, 0.24] | [0.03, 0.22] | [0.06, 0.26] | [0.10, 0.32] | |
C23 | [0.06, 0.27] | [0.06, 0.25] | [0.06, 0.25] | [0.05, 0.24] | [0.06, 0.27] | [0.11, 0.34] | |
C24 | [0.04, 0.24] | [0.07, 0.26] | [0.06, 0.23] | [0.04, 0.22] | [0.08, 0.26] | … | [0.11, 0.32] |
C31 | [0.08, 0.27] | [0.05, 0.26] | [0.08, 0.25] | [0.06, 0.24] | [0.05, 0.26] | [0.08, 0.31] | |
C32 | [0.07, 0.24] | [0.04, 0.22] | [0.05, 0.21] | [0.03, 0.19] | [0.04, 0.22] | [0.08, 0.28] | |
C33 | [0.06, 0.29] | [0.06, 0.29] | [0.06, 0.28] | [0.06, 0.27] | [0.08, 0.28] | [0.09, 0.34] | |
C41 | [0.05, 0.22] | [0.05, 0.22] | [0.02, 0.19] | [0.03, 0.19] | [0.02, 0.21] | [0.07, 0.27] | |
C42 | [0.01, 0.15] | [0.01, 0.15] | [0.01, 0.13] | [0.02, 0.15] | [0.01, 0.14] | [0.04, 0.20] | |
C43 | [0.04, 0.20] | [0.05, 0.20] | [0.02, 0.18] | [0.03, 0.18] | [0.03, 0.19] | [0.08, 0.27] | |
C44 | [0.04, 0.21] | [0.05, 0.22] | [0.03, 0.20] | [0.03, 0.20] | [0.03, 0.21] | [0.03, 0.21] |
C1 | [0.27, 1.07] | [0.21, 0.94] | [0.47, 2.01] | [−0.67, 0.86] | C11 | [1.10, 4.36] | [0.87, 3.67] | [1.97, 8.03] | [−2.57, 3.50] |
C12 | [1.15, 4.21] | [0.83, 3.65] | [1.98, 7.85] | [−2.50, 3.38] | |||||
C13 | [0.89, 3.92] | [0.74, 3.42] | [1.64, 7.33] | [−2.52, 3.17] | |||||
C14 | [0.90, 3.59] | [0.67, 3.30] | [1.57, 6.89] | [−2.40, 2.92] | |||||
C2 | [0.22, 1.01] | [0.18, 0.95] | [0.41, 1.96] | [−0.73, 0.82] | C21 | [0.79, 3.77] | [0.69, 3.52] | [1.48, 7.29] | [−2.73, 3.08] |
C22 | [0.83, 3.79] | [0.69, 3.58] | [1.52, 7.37] | [−2.74, 3.10] | |||||
C23 | [0.95, 3.94] | [0.64, 3.41] | [1.60, 7.36] | [−2.46, 3.30] | |||||
C24 | [0.84, 3.68] | [0.70, 3.71] | [1.54, 7.40] | [−2.87, 2.98] | |||||
C3 | [0.21, 0.99] | [0.15, 0.88] | [0.36, 1.87] | [−0.67, 0.83] | C31 | [0.82, 3.75] | [0.63, 3.39] | [1.45, 7.15] | [−2.57, 3.12] |
C32 | [0.69, 3.28] | [0.58, 3.32] | [1.27, 6.61] | [−2.63, 2.71] | |||||
C33 | [0.92, 4.15] | [0.51, 3.22] | [1.43, 7.38] | [−2.30, 3.64] | |||||
C4 | [0.13, 0.77] | [0.28, 1.05] | [0.41, 1.82] | [−0.93, 0.49] | C41 | [0.54, 3.15] | [1.22, 4.26] | [1.76, 7.41] | [−3.72, 1.93] |
C42 | [0.24, 2.24] | [0.41, 2.52] | [0.66, 4.76] | [−2.28, 1.82] | |||||
C43 | [0.56, 2.97] | [1.27, 4.46] | [1.83, 7.43] | [−3.90, 1.70] | |||||
C44 | [0.56, 3.17] | [1.34, 4.55] | [1.89, 7.72] | [−4.00, 1.83] |
C1 | 0.67 | 0.57 | 1.24 | 0.09 | C11 | 2.73 | 2.27 | 5.00 | 0.47 |
C12 | 2.68 | 2.24 | 4.91 | 0.44 | |||||
C13 | 2.41 | 2.08 | 4.48 | 0.33 | |||||
C14 | 2.25 | 1.98 | 4.23 | 0.26 | |||||
C2 | 0.62 | 0.57 | 1.18 | 0.05 | C21 | 2.28 | 2.10 | 4.38 | 0.17 |
C22 | 2.31 | 2.13 | 4.44 | 0.18 | |||||
C23 | 2.45 | 2.03 | 4.48 | 0.42 | |||||
C24 | 2.26 | 2.21 | 4.47 | 0.06 | |||||
C3 | 0.60 | 0.52 | 1.12 | 0.08 | C31 | 2.29 | 2.01 | 4.30 | 0.28 |
C32 | 1.99 | 1.95 | 3.94 | 0.04 | |||||
C33 | 2.54 | 1.87 | 4.41 | 0.67 | |||||
C4 | 0.45 | 0.67 | 1.11 | −0.22 | C41 | 1.85 | 2.74 | 4.58 | −0.89 |
C42 | 1.24 | 1.47 | 2.71 | −0.23 | |||||
C43 | 1.77 | 2.87 | 4.63 | −1.10 | |||||
C44 | 1.86 | 2.94 | 4.80 | −1.08 |
C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C21 | … | C44 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | [0.128, 0.213] | [0.333, 0.275] | [0.289, 0.267] | [0.356, 0.281] | [0.255, 0.260] | [0.286, 0.255] | |
C12 | [0.285, 0.268] | [0.129, 0.215] | [0.298, 0.280] | [0.289, 0.274] | [0.279, 0.266] | [0.314, 0.261] | |
C13 | [0.290, 0.262] | [0.269, 0.258] | [0.099, 0.197] | [0.261, 0.260] | [0.283, 0.250] | [0.192, 0.243] | |
C14 | [0.297, 0.256] | [0.269, 0.252] | [0.314, 0.256] | [0.094, 0.184] | [0.183, 0.224] | [0.208, 0.241] | |
C21 | [0.252, 0.248] | [0.247, 0.246] | [0.249, 0.242] | [0.166, 0.229] | [0.123, 0.202] | [0.234, 0.248] | |
C22 | [0.235, 0.243] | [0.278, 0.255] | [0.247, 0.260] | [0.207, 0.256] | [0.272, 0.265] | [0.229, 0.248] | |
C23 | [0.263, 0.247] | [0.231, 0.237] | [0.240, 0.235] | [0.343, 0.249] | [0.230, 0.250] | [0.260, 0.242] | |
C24 | [0.250, 0.262] | [0.244, 0.262] | [0.265, 0.263] | [0.284, 0.266] | [0.375, 0.283] | … | [0.278, 0.262] |
C31 | [0.366, 0.340] | [0.315, 0.333] | [0.399, 0.346] | [0.379, 0.344] | [0.394, 0.347] | [0.361, 0.335] | |
C32 | [0.304, 0.329] | [0.337, 0.332] | [0.292, 0.334] | [0.326, 0.335] | [0.360, 0.335] | [0.351, 0.335] | |
C33 | [0.330, 0.331] | [0.348, 0.335] | [0.309, 0.320] | [0.295, 0.320] | [0.246, 0.319] | [0.288, 0.330] | |
C41 | [0.292, 0.269] | [0.282, 0.270] | [0.276, 0.272] | [0.291, 0.266] | [0.284, 0.272] | [0.329, 0.295] | |
C42 | [0.111, 0.168] | [0.095, 0.158] | [0.098, 0.158] | [0.118, 0.165] | [0.089, 0.155] | [0.094, 0.162] | |
C43 | [0.288, 0.277] | [0.308, 0.284] | [0.312, 0.283] | [0.288, 0.278] | [0.323, 0.286] | [0.417, 0.307] | |
C44 | [0.309, 0.286] | [0.315, 0.288] | [0.313, 0.286] | [0.302, 0.291] | [0.303, 0.288] | [0.161, 0.236] |
C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C21 | … | C44 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | [0.034, 0.051] | [0.088, 0.066] | [0.076, 0.064] | [0.094, 0.068] | [0.056, 0.063] | [0.070, 0.063] | |
C12 | [0.075, 0.065] | [0.034, 0.052] | [0.078, 0.067] | [0.076, 0.066] | [0.061, 0.064] | [0.076, 0.064] | |
C13 | [0.076, 0.063] | [0.071, 0.062] | [0.026, 0.047] | [0.069, 0.063] | [0.062, 0.060] | [0.047, 0.060] | |
C14 | [0.078, 0.062] | [0.071, 0.061] | [0.083, 0.062] | [0.025, 0.044] | [0.040, 0.054] | [0.051, 0.059] | |
C21 | [0.053, 0.061] | [0.052, 0.061] | [0.053, 0.060] | [0.035, 0.057] | [0.027, 0.049] | [0.048, 0.061] | |
C22 | [0.050, 0.060] | [0.059, 0.063] | [0.052, 0.064] | [0.044, 0.063] | [0.061, 0.065] | [0.046, 0.061] | |
C23 | [0.056, 0.061] | [0.049, 0.059] | [0.051, 0.058] | [0.072, 0.062] | [0.051, 0.061] | [0.053, 0.060] | |
C24 | [0.053, 0.065] | [0.051, 0.065] | [0.056, 0.065] | [0.060, 0.066] | [0.083, 0.069] | … | [0.057, 0.065] |
C31 | [0.067, 0.080] | [0.058, 0.078] | [0.074, 0.081] | [0.070, 0.081] | [0.070, 0.080] | [0.082, 0.080] | |
C32 | [0.056, 0.077] | [0.062, 0.078] | [0.054, 0.078] | [0.060, 0.079] | [0.064, 0.078] | [0.080, 0.080] | |
C33 | [0.061, 0.078] | [0.064, 0.079] | [0.057, 0.075] | [0.054, 0.075] | [0.044, 0.074] | [0.065, 0.079] | |
C41 | [0.099, 0.075] | [0.096, 0.075] | [0.094, 0.076] | [0.099, 0.074] | [0.108, 0.077] | [0.107, 0.079] | |
C42 | [0.038, 0.047] | [0.032, 0.044] | [0.034, 0.044] | [0.040, 0.046] | [0.034, 0.044] | [0.031, 0.043] | |
C43 | [0.098, 0.077] | [0.105, 0.079] | [0.106, 0.079] | [0.098, 0.077] | [0.123, 0.081] | [0.136, 0.082] | |
C44 | [0.105, 0.079] | [0.107, 0.080] | [0.107, 0.080] | [0.103, 0.081] | [0.115, 0.081] | [0.052, 0.063] |
Local Weight | De-Roughness | Local Weight | De-Roughness | Global Weight | De-Roughness | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | [0.054, 0.245] | 0.150 (2) | C11 | [0.283, 0.262] | 0.273 (1) | [0.015, 0.064] | 0.040 (7) |
C12 | [0.275, 0.260] | 0.267 (2) | [0.015, 0.064] | 0.039 (8) | |||
C13 | [0.228, 0.243] | 0.235 (3) | [0.012, 0.060] | 0.036 (12) | |||
C14 | [0.214, 0.235] | 0.224 (4) | [0.012, 0.058] | 0.035 (14) | |||
C2 | [0.047, 0.249] | 0.143 (3) | C21 | [0.247, 0.247] | 0.247 (3) | [0.012, 0.062] | 0.037 (11) |
C22 | [0.250, 0.251] | 0.250 (2) | [0.012, 0.062] | 0.037 (10) | |||
C23 | [0.245, 0.241] | 0.243 (4) | [0.012,0.060] | 0.036 (13) | |||
C24 | [0.258, 0.261] | 0.259 (1) | [0.012, 0.065] | 0.038 (9) | |||
C3 | [0.042, 0.231] | 0.137 (4) | C31 | [0.366, 0.342] | 0.354 (1) | [0.015, 0.079] | 0.047 (4) |
C32 | [0.338, 0.334] | 0.336 (2) | [0.014, 0.077] | 0.046 (5) | |||
C33 | [0.296, 0.324] | 0.310 (3) | [0.012, 0.075] | 0.044 (6) | |||
C4 | [0.073, 0.275] | 0.174 (1) | C41 | [0.283, 0.270] | 0.277 (3) | [0.021, 0.074] | 0.047 (3) |
C42 | [0.099, 0.160] | 0.129 (4) | [0.007, 0.044] | 0.026 (15) | |||
C43 | [0.300, 0.282] | 0.291 (2) | [0.022, 0.078] | 0.050 (2) | |||
C44 | [0.318, 0.288] | 0.303 (1) | [0.023,0.079] | 0.051 (1) |
No. 1 | No. 2 | No. 3 | No. 4 | No. 5 | No. 6 | No. 7 | No. 8 | No. 9 | No. 10 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | 75 | 71 | 90 | 80 | 75 | 75 | 80 | 90 | 80 | 85 |
C12 | 70 | 75 | 85 | 85 | 75 | 75 | 60 | 80 | 90 | 80 |
C13 | 70 | 84 | 80 | 80 | 75 | 85 | 80 | 80 | 90 | 90 |
C14 | 60 | 77 | 76 | 75 | 70 | 80 | 50 | 90 | 95 | 95 |
C21 | 65 | 71 | 71 | 85 | 83 | 85 | 80 | 90 | 85 | 85 |
C22 | 70 | 88 | 62 | 90 | 85 | 85 | 71 | 80 | 85 | 85 |
C23 | 70 | 72 | 77 | 75 | 70 | 60 | 70 | 80 | 90 | 80 |
C24 | 70 | 76 | 80 | 80 | 70 | 85 | 70 | 80 | 85 | 95 |
C31 | 75 | 66 | 87 | 70 | 70 | 75 | 60 | 80 | 80 | 80 |
C32 | 60 | 62 | 88 | 70 | 81 | 60 | 50 | 70 | 80 | 80 |
C33 | 70 | 69 | 77 | 70 | 70 | 60 | 60 | 70 | 85 | 88 |
C41 | 70 | 80 | 70 | 80 | 70 | 70 | 30 | 70 | 70 | 80 |
C42 | 70 | 61 | 64 | 80 | 80 | 70 | 30 | 80 | 85 | 85 |
C43 | 70 | 70 | 77 | 85 | 80 | 70 | 70 | 80 | 90 | 90 |
C44 | 75 | 80 | 80 | 80 | 70 | 70 | 60 | 80 | 90 | 90 |
Global Weight | Aspiration-Level | Rough Evaluation Scores | Relative Significance | |
---|---|---|---|---|
C11 | [0.015, 0.064] | [100, 100] | [76.054, 84.427] | 0.030 (10) |
C12 | [0.015, 0.064] | [100, 100] | [71.487, 83.015] | 0.029 (7) |
C13 | [0.012, 0.060] | [100, 100] | [77.298, 85.415] | 0.027 (4) |
C14 | [0.012, 0.058] | [100, 100] | [65.851, 86.906] | 0.026 (3) |
C21 | [0.012, 0.062] | [100, 100] | [74.431, 84.755] | 0.027 (5) |
C22 | [0.012, 0.062] | [100, 100] | [73.702, 85.560] | 0.028 (6) |
C23 | [0.012,0.060] | [100, 100] | [69.070, 80.022] | 0.025 (2) |
C24 | [0.012, 0.065] | [100, 100] | [74.070, 84.447] | 0.029 (8) |
C31 | [0.015, 0.079] | [100, 100] | [68.763 79.569] | 0.033 (13) |
C32 | [0.014, 0.077] | [100, 100] | [61.654, 78.396] | 0.031 (12) |
C33 | [0.012, 0.075] | [100, 100] | [66.126, 77.937] | 0.030 (9) |
C41 | [0.021, 0.074] | [100, 100] | [62.271, 74.900] | 0.031 (11) |
C42 | [0.007, 0.044] | [100, 100] | [58.679, 79.539] | 0.018 (1) |
C43 | [0.022, 0.078] | [100, 100] | [73.076, 83.480] | 0.036 (14) |
C44 | [0.023,0.079] | [100, 100] | [71.458, 83.187] | 0.037 (15) |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shao, Q.-G.; Liou, J.J.H.; Weng, S.-S.; Chuang, Y.-C. A Rough Hybrid Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Improving the Quality of a Research Information System. Symmetry 2019, 11, 1248. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11101248
Shao Q-G, Liou JJH, Weng S-S, Chuang Y-C. A Rough Hybrid Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Improving the Quality of a Research Information System. Symmetry. 2019; 11(10):1248. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11101248
Chicago/Turabian StyleShao, Qi-Gan, James J. H. Liou, Sung-Shun Weng, and Yen-Ching Chuang. 2019. "A Rough Hybrid Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Improving the Quality of a Research Information System" Symmetry 11, no. 10: 1248. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11101248
APA StyleShao, Q.-G., Liou, J. J. H., Weng, S.-S., & Chuang, Y.-C. (2019). A Rough Hybrid Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for Improving the Quality of a Research Information System. Symmetry, 11(10), 1248. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11101248