Sensitivity analysis of TOPSIS method in water quality assessment II: sensitivity to the index input data
Tóm tắt
This is the second part of the study on sensitivity analysis of the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) method in water quality assessment. In the present study, the sensitivity of the TOPSIS method to the index input data was investigated. The sensitivity was first theoretically analyzed under two major assumptions. One assumption was that one index or more of the samples were perturbed with the same ratio while other indices kept unchanged. The other one was that all indices of a given sample were changed simultaneously with the same ratio, while the indices of other samples were unchanged. Furthermore, a case study under assumption 2 was also carried out in this paper. When the same indices of different water samples are changed simultaneously with the same variation ratio, the final water quality assessment results will not be influenced at all. When the input data of all indices of a given sample are perturbed with the same variation ratio, the assessment values of all samples will be influenced theoretically. However, the case study shows that only the perturbed sample is sensitive to the variation, and a simple linear equation representing the relation between the closeness coefficient (CC) values of the perturbed sample and variation ratios can be derived under the assumption 2. This linear equation can be used for determining the sample orders under various variation ratios.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Afshar, A., Mariño, M. A., Saadatpour, M., & Afshar, A. (2011). Fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis applied to Karun reservoirs system. Water Resources Manage, 25, 545–563. doi:10.1007/s11269-010-9713-x.
Awasthi, A., Chauhan, S. S., Omrani, H., & Panahi, A. (2011). A hybrid approach based on SERVQUAL and fuzzy TOPSIS for evaluating transportation service quality. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 61, 637–646. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2011.04.019.
Cacuci, D. G. (2003). Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, volume I: theory. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Cacuci, D. G., & Ionescu-Bujor, M. (2004). A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems. II: statistical methods. Nuclear Science and Engineering, 147(3), 204–217.
Cacuci, D. G., Ionescu-Bujor, M., & Navon, I. M. (2005). Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, volume II: applications to large-scale systems. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis.
Chen, T. Y. (2012). Comparative analysis of SAW and TOPSIS based on interval-valued fuzzy sets: discussions on score functions and weight constraints. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 1848–1861. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.065.
Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications. Heidelberg: Springer.
Hyde, K. M., Maier, H. R., & Colby, C. B. (2005). A distance-based uncertainty analysis approach to multi-criteria decision analysis for water resource decision making. Journal of Environmental Management, 77, 278–290. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.011.
Ionescu-Bujor, M., & Cacuci, D. G. (2004). A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems. I: deterministic methods. Nuclear Science and Engineering, 147(3), 189–203.
Li, P. Y., Qian, H., & Wu, J. H. (2011a). Hydrochemical formation mechanisms and quality assessment of groundwater with improved TOPSIS method in Pengyang County Northwest China. E-Journal of Chemistry, 8(3), 1164–1173.
Li, P. Y., Wu, J. H., & Qian, H. (2011b). Groundwater quality assessment based on rough sets attribute reduction and TOPSIS method in a semi-arid area, China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2306-1. Online First.
Manache, G., & Melching, C. S. (2004). Sensitivity analysis of a water-quality model using Latin hypercube sampling. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 130(3), 232–242. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2004)130:3(232).
Nakane, K., & Haidary, A. (2010). Sensitivity analysis of stream water quality and land cover linkage models using Monte Carlo method. International Journal Environment Resources, 4(1), 121–130.
Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 445–455. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1.
Rickwood, C. J., & Carr, G. M. (2009). Development and sensitivity analysis of a global drinking water quality index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 156, 73–90. doi:10.1007/s10661-008-0464-6.
Sadi-Nezhad, S., & Damghani, K. K. (2010). Application of a fuzzy TOPSIS method base on modified preference ratio and fuzzy distance measurement in assessment of traffic police centers performance. Applied Soft Computing, 10, 1028–1039. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2009.08.036.
Sun, C. C. (2010). A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 7745–7754. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.066.
Wang, J. R., Fan, K., & Wang, W. S. (2010). Integration of fuzzy AHP and FPP with TOPSIS methodology for aeroengine health assessment. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 8516–8526. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.024.
Xu, S. L., & Xue, S. (1994). The sensitivity comprehensive index of environmental quality (CIEQ): with an analysis of current CIEQs. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 14(3), 269–274 (in Chinese).
Yang, X. H., Yang, Z. F., & Shen, Z. Y. (2004). An ideal interval method of multi-objective decision-making for comprehensive assessment of water resources renewability. Science in China, Series E, 47(S1), 42–49. doi:10.1360/04ez0004.
Yang, X. H., She, D. X., Yang, Z. F., Tang, Q. H., & Li, J. Q. (2009). Chaotic Bayesian method based on multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) for forecasting nonlinear hydrological time series. International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation, 10(11–12), 1595–1610.
Yang, X. H., Zhang, X. J., & Hu, X. X. (2011). Nonlinear Optimization Set Pair Analysis Model (NOSPAM) for assessing water resource renewability. Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics, 18, 599–607. doi:10.5194/npg-18-599-2011.
Yuan, S. J., Wang, Q. R., Fan, S. Y., & Li, X. Q. (1998). Analysis of the sensitivity of the index method used in environmental quality assessment. Journal of Jianghan Petroleum Institute, 20(3), 66–70 (in Chinese).