Towards Integration of Multi Objective Optimization and Multi Criteria Decision Making


Journal of Computer and Communication Networks

Received On : 02 June 2025

Revised On : 30 July 2025

Accepted On : 25 August 2025

Published On : 26 October 2025

Volume 01, 2025

Pages : 222-235


PDF
Download

DOI
https://doi.org/10.64026/JCCN/2025021
Article Views
Abstract

Multi Objective Optimization (MOO) is the procedure of arriving at the best solution, where the objectives are in competition with one another. The idea is to classify such solutions that optimize the value of objectives without compromising any of the objectives’ performance. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approaches provide systematic approaches to estimate and rank the options based on the criteria or attributes. This research paper presents a critical review of MOO and MCDM approaches applied in the current literature. Out of the 41 articles that were reviewed, it was identified that 70.7% of the articles that were being used were metaheuristic optimization methods. The first, and the most frequently applied, approach identified in 41.5% of the articles was NSGA-II, which is an evolutionary algorithm. As for MCDM methods, 48.8% of the articles used subjective weights, and the remaining ones were Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Best-Worst Method (BWM). Besides, the ranking method that was frequently employed was TOPSIS, accounting for approximately 43.9% of the articles. The use of MOO and MCDM was mainly performed sequentially (post-hoc) in 78.1% of the analyzed articles. In addition, uncertainty was accounted for by 80.5% of the MOO models through Monte Carlo Simulation and triangular fuzzy numbers. Conversely, the aspect of uncertainty was addressed in only 29.3% of the MCDM models, where the most common methods were the fuzzy set approach and probability distributions. The ability of the model to be less delicate to the changes in the input parameters was tested in 39% of the analyzed papers through sensitivity analysis.

Keywords

Best-Worst Method (BWM), Non-Dominated Sorting Differential Evolution (NSDE), Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA), Multi-Objective Optimization (MOO), Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM), Techniques for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Crow Search Algorithm (CSA).

  1. H. Taherdoost and M. Madanchian, “Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) Methods and Concepts,” Encyclopedia, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 77–87, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/encyclopedia3010006.
  2. T. L. Saaty, “An Exposition of the AHP in Reply to the Paper ‘Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process,’” Management Science, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 259–268, Mar. 1990, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.36.3.259.
  3. G. Haixiang, L. Yijing, J. Shang, G. Mingyun, H. Yuanyue, and G. Bing, “Learning from class-imbalanced data: Review of methods and applications,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 73, pp. 220–239, May 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2016.12.035.
  4. P. T. Harker and L. G. Vargas, “Reply to ‘Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process’ by J. S. Dyer,” Management Science, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 269–273, Mar. 1990, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.36.3.269.
  5. M. Stojčić, E. K. Zavadskas, D. Pamučar, Ž. Stević, and A. Mardani, “Application of MCDM Methods in Sustainability Engineering: A Literature Review 2008–2018,” Symmetry, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 350, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.3390/sym11030350.
  6. A. Paul, N. Shukla, S. K. Paul, and A. Trianni, “Sustainable Supply Chain Management and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Systematic Review,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 13, p. 7104, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13137104.
  7. P. Bonissone, R. Subbu, and J. Lizzi, “Multicriteria decision making (mcdm): a framework for research and applications,” IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 48–61, Aug. 2009, doi: 10.1109/mci.2009.933093.
  8. B. H. Massam, “Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques in planning,” Progress in Planning, vol. 30, pp. 1–84, Jan. 1988, doi: 10.1016/0305-9006(88)90012-8.
  9. W. E. Walker et al., “Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support,” Integrated Assessment, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 5–17, Mar. 2003, doi: 10.1076/iaij.4.1.5.16466.
  10. R. Lipshitz and O. Strauss, “Coping with Uncertainty: A Naturalistic Decision-Making Analysis,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 149–163, Feb. 1997, doi: 10.1006/obhd.1997.2679.
  11. S. J. Reynolds, F. C. Schultz, and D. R. Hekman, “Stakeholder Theory and Managerial Decision-Making: Constraints and Implications of Balancing Stakeholder Interests,” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 285–301, Mar. 2006, doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-5493-2.
  12. M. Sousa, M. F. Almeida, and R. Calili, “Multiple Criteria Decision Making for the Achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals: A Systematic Literature Review and a Research Agenda,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 8, p. 4129, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13084129.
  13. M.-T. Lu, C.-C. Hsu, J. J. H. Liou, and H.-W. Lo, “A hybrid MCDM and sustainability-balanced scorecard model to establish sustainable performance evaluation for international airports,” Journal of Air Transport Management, vol. 71, pp. 9–19, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2018.05.008.
  14. R. Alshahrani et al., “Establishing the fuzzy integrated hybrid MCDM framework to identify the key barriers to implementing artificial intelligence-enabled sustainable cloud system in an IT industry,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 238, p. 121732, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121732.
  15. G. P. Rangaiah, Z. Feng, and A. F. Hoadley, “Multi-Objective Optimization Applications in Chemical Process Engineering: Tutorial and Review,” Processes, vol. 8, no. 5, p. 508, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.3390/pr8050508.
  16. T. J. Emery, C. Gardner, K. Hartmann, and I. Cartwright, “Incorporating economics into fisheries management frameworks in Australia,” Marine Policy, vol. 77, pp. 136–143, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2016.12.018.
  17. R. Q. Grafton et al., “Incentive-based approaches to sustainable fisheries,” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 699–710, Mar. 2006, doi: 10.1139/f05-247.
  18. R. Aguilar-Rivera, M. Valenzuela-Rendón, and J. J. Rodríguez-Ortiz, “Genetic algorithms and Darwinian approaches in financial applications: A survey,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 21, pp. 7684–7697, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2015.06.001.
  19. L. L. Macedo, “<div>An Inquiry into the Validity of&nbsp;<span>Technical Analysis in Financial Markets&nbsp;</span><span>With the Use of Evolutionary Techniques</span></div>,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2024, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4968560.
  20. A. Ponsich, A. L. Jaimes, and C. A. C. Coello, “A Survey on Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms for the Solution of the Portfolio Optimization Problem and Other Finance and Economics Applications,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 321–344, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1109/tevc.2012.2196800.
  21. K. P. Anagnostopoulos and G. Mamanis, “The mean–variance cardinality constrained portfolio optimization problem: An experimental evaluation of five multiobjective evolutionary algorithms,” Expert Systems with Applications, May 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.233.
  22. G. J. Stigler, “The Economics of Information,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 213–225, Jun. 1961, doi: 10.1086/258464.
  23. C. Hamarat, J. H. Kwakkel, E. Pruyt, and E. T. Loonen, “An exploratory approach for adaptive policymaking by using multi-objective robust optimization,” Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, vol. 46, pp. 25–39, Aug. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.simpat.2014.02.008.
  24. L. Cooper, “Heuristic Methods for Location-Allocation Problems,” SIAM Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 37–53, Jan. 1964, doi: 10.1137/1006005.
  25. M. H. Haqqani, M. Azizuddin, S. S. Qarnain, and S. Bathrinath, “Analyzing Properties of Air as a natural refrigerant using MCDM methodology,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 1059, no. 1, p. 012040, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1757-899x/1059/1/012040.
  26. S. Saluja, A. Gaur, and S. Abbas, “Assessment of Pavement Surface Quality using TOPSIS Method,” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 796, no. 1, p. 012015, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/796/1/012015.
  27. G. Yang, Y. Cao, and H. Tao, “A Method for Multi-objective Optimization and Application in Automobile Impact,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1802, no. 3, p. 032129, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1802/3/032129.
  28. R. R. Rani and D. Ramyachitra, “Application of genetic algorithm by influencing the crossover parameters for multiple sequence alignment,” 2017 4th IEEE Uttar Pradesh Section International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Electronics (UPCON), pp. 33–38, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1109/upcon.2017.8251018.
  29. R. Monalisa and K. Kusnawi, “Decision support system of model teacher selection using PROMETHEE method,” 2017 International Conference on Innovative and Creative Information Technology (ICITech), Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1109/innocit.2017.8319147.
  30. V. Snášel, R. M. Rizk-Allah, and A. E. Hassanien, “Guided golden jackal optimization using elite-opposition strategy for efficient design of multi-objective engineering problems,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 35, no. 28, pp. 20771–20802, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00521-023-08850-0.
  31. A. Farooq, M. Nabeel, and G. Ali, “New MCDM applications using cubic bipolar fuzzy model in medicine and engineering,” Soft Computing, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s00500-023-09256-9.
  32. I. Costa-Carrapiço, R. Raslan, and J. N. González, “A systematic review of genetic algorithm-based multi-objective optimisation for building retrofitting strategies towards energy efficiency,” Energy and Buildings, vol. 210, p. 109690, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.109690.
  33. H. Li, W. Wang, L. Fan, Q. Li, and X. Chen, “A novel hybrid MCDM model for machine tool selection using fuzzy DEMATEL, entropy weighting and later defuzzification VIKOR,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 91, p. 106207, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106207.
  34. A. Tabbah, M. B. C. Aries, A. Moscati, and P. Johansson, “Exploring Simulation Workflows, Tools, and Metrics for Beyond-Vision Effects in Multi-Objective Optimization: A Scoping Review,” IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 1320, no. 1, p. 012009, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1320/1/012009.
  35. D. Uzun Ozsahin, B. B. Duwa, B. Uzun, M. S. Musa, and I. Ozsahin, “Evaluation of new scintillation crystals with MCDM methods for brain PET,” Journal of Instrumentation, vol. 19, no. 04, p. C04062, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/19/04/c04062.
  36. C. Zhang and J. Fu, “Multi-objective Optimization of Path-Constrained Switched Systems Using the Modified ε-Constraint Method,” 2021 China Automation Congress (CAC), pp. 2898–2901, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1109/cac53003.2021.9728222.
  37. S. Ahmed, S. Roy, and G. Rabiul Alam, “Benchmarking and Selecting Optimal Diabetic Retinopathy Detecting Machine Learning Model using Entropy and TOPSIS Method,” 2021 International Conference on Electrical, Computer, Communications and Mechatronics Engineering (ICECCME), pp. 1–6, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1109/iceccme52200.2021.9591153.
  38. L. Li, L. Jiao, J. Zhao, R. Shang, and M. Gong, “Quantum-behaved discrete multi-objective particle swarm optimization for complex network clustering,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 63, pp. 1–14, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.patcog.2016.09.013.
  39. M. Bagherikahvarin and Y. De Smet, “Determining new possible weight values in PROMETHEE: a procedure based on data envelopment analysis,” Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 484–495, May 2017, doi: 10.1057/s41274-016-0107-1.
  40. F. Mohammadi and H. Abdi, “A modified crow search algorithm (MCSA) for solving economic load dispatch problem,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 71, pp. 51–65, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2018.06.040.
  41. X. Yu, S. Zhang, X. Liao, and X. Qi, “ELECTRE methods in prioritized MCDM environment,” Information Sciences, vol. 424, pp. 301–316, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2017.09.061.
  42. Z. Dong and X. Chen, “Multi Objective Optimization Design of Building Construction Period based on BIM and Genetic Algorithm,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1992, no. 2, p. 022184, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1992/2/022184.
  43. R. N. Hay’s, Z. Muttaqin, D. S. Maylawati, and M. A. Ramdhani, “Combining decision making algorithms to improve accuracy of the course assessment rank,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 1098, no. 3, p. 032045, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1757-899x/1098/3/032045.
  44. X. Cai, P. Wang, L. Du, Z. Cui, W. Zhang, and J. Chen, “Multi-Objective Three-Dimensional DV-Hop Localization Algorithm With NSGA-II,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 19, no. 21, pp. 10003–10015, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1109/jsen.2019.2927733.
  45. R. F. de F. Aires and L. Ferreira, “A new approach to avoid rank reversal cases in the TOPSIS method,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 132, pp. 84–97, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2019.04.023.
  46. X. Li et al., “A novel two-stage constraints handling framework for real-world multi-constrained multi-objective optimization problem based on evolutionary algorithm,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 8212–8229, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10489-020-02174-5.
  47. B. Sarkar and A. Biswas, “Pythagorean fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS integrated approach for transportation management through a new distance measure,” Soft Computing, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 4073–4089, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s00500-020-05433-2.
  48. B. Tang, Z. Zhu, H.-S. Shin, A. Tsourdos, and J. Luo, “A framework for multi-objective optimisation based on a new self-adaptive particle swarm optimisation algorithm,” Information Sciences, vol. 420, pp. 364–385, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2017.08.076.
  49. B. Debbarma, P. Chakraborti, P. K. Bose, M. Deb, and R. Banerjee, “Exploration of PROMETHEE II and VIKOR methodology in a MCDM approach for ascertaining the optimal performance-emission trade-off vantage in a hydrogen-biohol dual fuel endeavour,” Fuel, vol. 210, pp. 922–935, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2017.08.016.
  50. T. Wang, C. Zhang, A. He, and W. Dong, “Overview of Crow Search Algorithm,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 2258, no. 1, p. 012017, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2258/1/012017.
  51. N. Ezhilarasan and A. Felix, “Fuzzy ELECTRE and TOPSIS method to analyze the risk factors of tuberculosis,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 2267, no. 1, p. 012109, May 2022, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2267/1/012109.
  52. S. E. Bouzid, Y. Seresstou, K. Raoof, M. N. Omri, M. Mbarki, and C. Dridi, “MOONGA: Multi-Objective Optimization of Wireless Network Approach Based on Genetic Algorithm,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 105793–105814, 2020, doi: 10.1109/access.2020.2999157.
  53. W. Yang and Y. Wu, “A New Improvement Method to Avoid Rank Reversal in VIKOR,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 21261–21271, 2020, doi: 10.1109/access.2020.2969681.
  54. H. Kumar and S. P. Yadav, “Hybrid NSGA-II based decision-making in fuzzy multi-objective reliability optimization problem,” SN Applied Sciences, vol. 1, no. 11, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s42452-019-1512-2.
  55. S. Yadav, V. K. Pathak, and S. Gangwar, “A novel hybrid TOPSIS-PSI approach for material selection in marine applications,” Sādhanā, vol. 44, no. 3, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s12046-018-1020-x.
  56. X. Yang et al., “Multi-objective optimal scheduling for CCHP microgrids considering peak-load reduction by augmented ε-constraint method,” Renewable Energy, vol. 172, pp. 408–423, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.02.165.
  57. S. Ali Sadat, M. Vakilalroaya Fini, H. Hashemi-Dezaki, and M. Nazififard, “Barrier analysis of solar PV energy development in the context of Iran using fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 47, p. 101549, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2021.101549.
  58. Z. Lu, C. Shasha, M. Wenxiong, W. Yong, L. Guangmao, and C. Guoyan, “A Low Voltage Governance and Optimization Strategy for Distribution Network Based on Multi-objective Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 1659, no. 1, p. 012018, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1659/1/012018.
  59. I. G. Iwan Sudipa et al., “Application of MCDM using PROMETHEE II Technique in the Case of Social Media Selection for Online Businesses.,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 835, no. 1, p. 012059, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1757-899x/835/1/012059.
  60. I. Albandes et al., “Improving approximate-TMR using multi-objective optimization genetic algorithm,” 2018 IEEE 19th Latin-American Test Symposium (LATS), pp. 1–6, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1109/latw.2018.8349665.
  61. I. Irvanizam, N. Nazaruddin, and I. Syahrini, “Solving Decent Home Distribution Problem Using ELECTRE Method with Triangular Fuzzy Number,” 2018 International Conference on Applied Information Technology and Innovation (ICAITI), pp. 139–144, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1109/icaiti.2018.8686768.
  62. R. M. Rizk-Allah, A. E. Hassanien, and A. Slowik, “Multi-objective orthogonal opposition-based crow search algorithm for large-scale multi-objective optimization,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 32, no. 17, pp. 13715–13746, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s00521-020-04779-w.
  63. H. Eroğlu and R. Şahin, “A Neutrosophic VIKOR Method-Based Decision-Making with an Improved Distance Measure and Score Function: Case Study of Selection for Renewable Energy Alternatives,” Cognitive Computation, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1338–1355, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s12559-020-09765-x.
  64. H. Li, K. Deb, Q. Zhang, P. N. Suganthan, and L. Chen, “Comparison between MOEA/D and NSGA-III on a set of novel many and multi-objective benchmark problems with challenging difficulties,” Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, vol. 46, pp. 104–117, May 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.swevo.2019.02.003.
  65. K. Palczewski and W. Sałabun, “The fuzzy TOPSIS applications in the last decade,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 159, pp. 2294–2303, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.404.
  66. A. Susperregui, J. M. Herrero, M. I. Martinez, G. Tapia-Otaegui, and X. Blasco, “Multi-Objective Optimisation-Based Tuning of Two Second-Order Sliding-Mode Controller Variants for DFIGs Connected to Non-Ideal Grid Voltage,” Energies, vol. 12, no. 19, p. 3782, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.3390/en12193782.
  67. H. R. Maier, S. Razavi, Z. Kapelan, L. S. Matott, J. Kasprzyk, and B. A. Tolson, “Introductory overview: Optimization using evolutionary algorithms and other metaheuristics,” Environmental Modelling & Software, vol. 114, pp. 195–213, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.11.018.
  68. S. Arora, H. Singh, M. Sharma, S. Sharma, and P. Anand, “A New Hybrid Algorithm Based on Grey Wolf Optimization and Crow Search Algorithm for Unconstrained Function Optimization and Feature Selection,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 26343–26361, 2019, doi: 10.1109/access.2019.2897325.
  69. M. Jain, V. Singh, and A. Rani, “A novel nature-inspired algorithm for optimization: Squirrel search algorithm,” Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, vol. 44, pp. 148–175, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.swevo.2018.02.013.
  70. A. G. Hussien et al., “Crow Search Algorithm: Theory, Recent Advances, and Applications,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 173548–173565, 2020, doi: 10.1109/access.2020.3024108.
  71. A. Javidi, E. Salajegheh, and J. Salajegheh, “Enhanced crow search algorithm for optimum design of structures,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 77, pp. 274–289, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2019.01.026.
  72. G. I. Sayed, A. E. Hassanien, and A. T. Azar, “Feature selection via a novel chaotic crow search algorithm,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 171–188, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s00521-017-2988-6.
  73. S. Shirke and R. Udayakumar, “Evaluation of Crow Search Algorithm (CSA) for Optimization in Discrete Applications,” 2019 3rd International Conference on Trends in Electronics and Informatics (ICOEI), pp. 584–589, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1109/icoei.2019.8862669.
  74. S. Ouadfel and M. Abd Elaziz, “Enhanced Crow Search Algorithm for Feature Selection,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 159, p. 113572, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113572.
  75. E. N. Dragoi and V. Dafinescu, “Review of Metaheuristics Inspired from the Animal Kingdom,” Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 18, p. 2335, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.3390/math9182335.
  76. H. Deng, C.-H. Yeh, and R. J. Willis, “Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 963–973, Sep. 2000, doi: 10.1016/s0305-0548(99)00069-6.
  77. Y. Liu, L. Li, Y. Tu, and Y. Mei, “Fuzzy TOPSIS-EW Method with Multi-Granularity Linguistic Assessment Information for Emergency Logistics Performance Evaluation,” Symmetry, vol. 12, no. 8, p. 1331, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.3390/sym12081331.
  78. B. Özkan, E. Özceylan, M. Kabak, and M. Dağdeviren, “Evaluating the websites of academic departments through SEO criteria: a hesitant fuzzy linguistic MCDM approach,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 875–905, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10462-019-09681-z.
  79. Z. Wang and G. P. Rangaiah, “Application and Analysis of Methods for Selecting an Optimal Solution from the Pareto-Optimal Front obtained by Multiobjective Optimization,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 560–574, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.6b03453.
  80. J. R. Figueira, S. Greco, B. Roy, and R. Słowiński, “An Overview of ELECTRE Methods and their Recent Extensions,” Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, vol. 20, no. 1–2, pp. 61–85, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1002/mcda.1482.
  81. K. Govindan and M. B. Jepsen, “ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 250, no. 1, pp. 1–29, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.07.019.
  82. L. Abdullah, W. Chan, and A. Afshari, “Application of PROMETHEE method for green supplier selection: a comparative result based on preference functions,” Journal of Industrial Engineering International, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 271–285, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s40092-018-0289-z.
  83. V. Balali, B. Zahraie, and A. Roozbahani, “Integration of ELECTRE III and PROMETHEE II Decision-Making Methods with an Interval Approach: Application in Selection of Appropriate Structural Systems,” Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 297–314, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000254.
  84. M. Nassereddine, A. Azar, A. Rajabzadeh, and A. Afsar, “Decision making application in collaborative emergency response: A new PROMETHEE preference function,” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, vol. 38, p. 101221, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101221.
  85. V. M. Athawale, P. Chatterjee, and S. Chakraborty, “Decision making for facility location selection using PROMETHEE II method,” International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, vol. 11, no. 1/2, p. 16, 2012, doi: 10.1504/ijise.2012.046652.
  86. J. Gyani, A. Ahmed, and M. A. Haq, “MCDM and Various Prioritization Methods in AHP for CSS: A Comprehensive Review,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 33492–33511, 2022, doi: 10.1109/access.2022.3161742.
  87. J. Ferdous, F. Bensebaa, A. S. Milani, K. Hewage, P. Bhowmik, and N. Pelletier, “Development of a Generic Decision Tree for the Integration of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) and Multi-Objective Optimization (MOO) Methods under Uncertainty to Facilitate Sustainability Assessment: A Methodical Review,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 7, p. 2684, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16072684.
  88. H. Zaidi, “Relevance of accurate Monte Carlo modeling in nuclear medical imaging,” Medical Physics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 574–608, Apr. 1999, doi: 10.1118/1.598559.
  89. T. Yu and Z. Lu, “A novel single-loop Kriging importance sampling method for estimating failure probability upper bound under random-interval mixed uncertainties,” Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 143, p. 108722, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2023.108722.
  90. S. M. Zanjirchi, M. Rezaeian Abrishami, and N. Jalilian, “Four decades of fuzzy sets theory in operations management: application of life-cycle, bibliometrics and content analysis,” Scientometrics, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 1289–1309, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11192-019-03077-0.
  91. K. BEVEN, “TOPMODEL: A critique,” Hydrological Processes, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 1069–1085, Jul. 1997, doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-1085(199707)11:9<1069::aid-hyp545>3.3.co;2-f.
  92. R. Cheng, Y. Jin, K. Narukawa, and B. Sendhoff, “A Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Using Gaussian Process-Based Inverse Modeling,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 838–856, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1109/tevc.2015.2395073.
  93. L. Martı´nez and F. Herrera, “An overview on the 2-tuple linguistic model for computing with words in decision making: Extensions, applications and challenges,” Information Sciences, vol. 207, pp. 1–18, Nov. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2012.04.025.
  94. H. Karunathilake, K. Hewage, J. Brinkerhoff, and R. Sadiq, “Optimal renewable energy supply choices for net-zero ready buildings: A life cycle thinking approach under uncertainty,” Energy and Buildings, vol. 201, pp. 70–89, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.07.030.
  95. W. Filisbino Passini, C. Aparecida Lana, V. Pfeifer, and F. J. Affonso, “Design of frameworks for self‐adaptive service‐oriented applications: A systematic analysis,” Software: Practice and Experience, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 5–38, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1002/spe.3013.
  96. K. Cage, “Optimizing mass customization through interaction variability and manufacturing trade-offs,” 2017. doi: 10.13016/m2rr1pq61.
  97. S. Verma, M. Pant, and V. Snasel, “A Comprehensive Review on NSGA-II for Multi-Objective Combinatorial Optimization Problems,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 57757–57791, 2021, doi: 10.1109/access.2021.3070634.
  98. S. Ramesh, S. Kannan, and S. Baskar, “Application of modified NSGA-II algorithm to multi-objective reactive power planning,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 741–753, Feb. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2011.09.015.
  99. I. Rahimi, A. H. Gandomi, K. Deb, F. Chen, and M. R. Nikoo, “Scheduling by NSGA-II: Review and Bibliometric Analysis,” Processes, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 98, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.3390/pr10010098.
  100. M. F. Torquato, G. Martinez-Ayuso, A. A. Fahmy, and J. Sienz, “Multi-Objective Optimization of Electric Arc Furnace Using the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 149715–149731, 2021, doi: 10.1109/access.2021.3125519.
  101. Y. F. Li, G. Sansavini, and E. Zio, “Non-dominated sorting binary differential evolution for the multi-objective optimization of cascading failures protection in complex networks,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 111, pp. 195–205, Mar. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2012.11.002.
  102. H. Ma, Y. Zhang, S. Sun, T. Liu, and Y. Shan, “A comprehensive survey on NSGA-II for multi-objective optimization and applications,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 56, no. 12, pp. 15217–15270, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10462-023-10526-z.
  103. X. D. Wang, C. Hirsch, Sh. Kang, and C. Lacor, “Multi-objective optimization of turbomachinery using improved NSGA-II and approximation model,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 200, no. 9–12, pp. 883–895, Feb. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.cma.2010.11.014.
  104. L. Wang, T. Wang, and Y. Luo, “Improved non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA)-II in multi-objective optimization studies of wind turbine blades,” Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 739–748, Jun. 2011, doi: 10.1007/s10483-011-1453-x.
  105. A. Berrichi, F. Yalaoui, L. Amodeo, and M. Mezghiche, “Bi-Objective Ant Colony Optimization approach to optimize production and maintenance scheduling,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 1584–1596, Sep. 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2009.11.017.
  106. A. Sathya Sofia and P. GaneshKumar, “Multi-objective Task Scheduling to Minimize Energy Consumption and Makespan of Cloud Computing Using NSGA-II,” Journal of Network and Systems Management, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 463–485, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s10922-017-9425-0.
  107. A. Vukadinović, J. Radosavljević, A. Đorđević, M. Protić, and N. Petrović, “Multi-objective optimization of energy performance for a detached residential building with a sunspace using the NSGA-II genetic algorithm,” Solar Energy, vol. 224, pp. 1426–1444, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2021.06.082.
  108. F. Luchi and R. A. Krohling, “Differential Evolution and Nelder-mead for Constrained Non-linear Integer Optimization Problems,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 55, pp. 668–677, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.071.
  109. S. Surender Reddy and P. R. Bijwe, “Differential evolution-based efficient multi-objective optimal power flow,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 31, no. S1, pp. 509–522, May 2017, doi: 10.1007/s00521-017-3009-5.
  110. G. Abbas, J. Gu, U. Farooq, M. U. Asad, and M. El-Hawary, “Solution of an Economic Dispatch Problem Through Particle Swarm Optimization: A Detailed Survey - Part I,” IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 15105–15141, 2017, doi: 10.1109/access.2017.2723862.
  111. M. Zambrano-Bigiarini and R. Rojas, “A model-independent Particle Swarm Optimisation software for model calibration,” Environmental Modelling & Software, vol. 43, pp. 5–25, May 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.01.004.
  112. M. J. Abraham et al., “GROMACS: High performance molecular simulations through multi-level parallelism from laptops to supercomputers,” SoftwareX, vol. 1–2, pp. 19–25, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.softx.2015.06.001.
  113. K. Hussain, M. N. Mohd Salleh, S. Cheng, and Y. Shi, “Metaheuristic research: a comprehensive survey,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 2191–2233, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1007/s10462-017-9605-z.
  114. J.-H. Yi, J. Wang, and G.-G. Wang, “Improved probabilistic neural networks with self-adaptive strategies for transformer fault diagnosis problem,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 8, no. 1, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1177/1687814015624832.
  115. Y. Hua, Q. Liu, K. Hao, and Y. Jin, “A Survey of Evolutionary Algorithms for Multi-Objective Optimization Problems With Irregular Pareto Fronts,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 303–318, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1109/jas.2021.1003817.
  116. Ş. Y. Balaman, A. Matopoulos, D. G. Wright, and J. Scott, “Integrated optimization of sustainable supply chains and transportation networks for multi technology bio-based production: A decision support system based on fuzzy ε-constraint method,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 172, pp. 2594–2617, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.150.
  117. S. Maeda, T. Kawachi, K. Unami, J. Takeuchi, and E. Ichion, “Controlling wasteloads from point and nonpoint sources to river system by GIS-aided Epsilon Robust Optimization model,” Journal of Hydro-environment Research, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 27–36, Apr. 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jher.2009.04.002.
  118. G. Mavrotas and K. Florios, “An improved version of the augmented ε-constraint method (AUGMECON2) for finding the exact pareto set in multi-objective integer programming problems,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 219, no. 18, pp. 9652–9669, May 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2013.03.002.
  119. S. A. Bouziaren and B. Aghezzaf, “An Improved Augmented <inline-formula> <tex-math notation=&qout;LaTeX&qout;>$\varepsilon$ </tex-math> </inline-formula>-Constraint and Branch-and-Cut Method to Solve the TSP With Profits,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 195–204, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1109/tits.2018.2808179.
  120. A. Nikas, A. Fountoulakis, A. Forouli, and H. Doukas, “A robust augmented ε-constraint method (AUGMECON-R) for finding exact solutions of multi-objective linear programming problems,” Operational Research, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 1291–1332, May 2020, doi: 10.1007/s12351-020-00574-6.
  121. C. A. Floudas and X. Lin, “Mixed Integer Linear Programming in Process Scheduling: Modeling, Algorithms, and Applications,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 139, no. 1, pp. 131–162, Oct. 2005, doi: 10.1007/s10479-005-3446-x.
  122. M. Charikar and V. Chatziafratis, “Approximate Hierarchical Clustering via Sparsest Cut and Spreading Metrics,” Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 841–854, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1137/1.9781611974782.53.
  123. A. Ballarin, D. Vecchiato, T. Tempesta, F. Marangon, and S. Troiano, “Biomass energy production in agriculture: A weighted goal programming analysis,” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 1123–1131, Mar. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.035.
  124. H. Karshenas, R. Santana, C. Bielza, and P. Larranaga, “Multiobjective Estimation of Distribution Algorithm Based on Joint Modeling of Objectives and Variables,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 519–542, Aug. 2014, doi: 10.1109/tevc.2013.2281524.
  125. S. Gütmen, S. K. Roy, and G.-W. Weber, “An overview of weighted goal programming: a multi-objective transportation problem with some fresh viewpoints,” Central European Journal of Operations Research, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 557–568, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10100-023-00861-5.
  126. E. B. Tirkolaee, A. Mardani, Z. Dashtian, M. Soltani, and G.-W. Weber, “A novel hybrid method using fuzzy decision making and multi-objective programming for sustainable-reliable supplier selection in two-echelon supply chain design,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 250, p. 119517, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119517.
  127. J. Rezaei, T. Nispeling, J. Sarkis, and L. Tavasszy, “A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 135, pp. 577–588, Nov. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.125.
  128. S. Moslem, O. Ghorbanzadeh, T. Blaschke, and S. Duleba, “Analysing Stakeholder Consensus for a Sustainable Transport Development Decision by the Fuzzy AHP and Interval AHP,” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 12, p. 3271, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.3390/su11123271.
  129. A. Azadeh and S. Abdolhossein Zadeh, “An integrated fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy multiple-criteria decision-making simulation approach for maintenance policy selection,” SIMULATION, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 3–18, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1177/0037549715616686.
  130. R. K. Singh, H. R. Murty, S. K. Gupta, and A. K. Dikshit, “An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies,” Ecological Indicators, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 189–212, Mar. 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.05.011.
  131. A. Gelman and C. Hennig, “Beyond Subjective and Objective in Statistics,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, vol. 180, no. 4, pp. 967–1033, Aug. 2017, doi: 10.1111/rssa.12276.
  132. M. Wu, T. Brockmeyer, M. Hartmann, M. Skunde, W. Herzog, and H.-C. Friederich, “Reward-related decision making in eating and weight disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence from neuropsychological studies,” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, vol. 61, pp. 177–196, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.11.017.
  133. J. Stegenga, “Is meta-analysis the platinum standard of evidence?,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 497–507, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2011.07.003.
  134. Y. Mao, C. You, J. Zhang, K. Huang, and K. B. Letaief, “A Survey on Mobile Edge Computing: The Communication Perspective,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 2322–2358, 2017, doi: 10.1109/comst.2017.2745201.
  135. E. Antipova, C. Pozo, G. Guillén-Gosálbez, D. Boer, L. F. Cabeza, and L. Jiménez, “On the use of filters to facilitate the post-optimal analysis of the Pareto solutions in multi-objective optimization,” Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 74, pp. 48–58, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.12.012.
  136. Z. Wang, S. S. Parhi, G. P. Rangaiah, and A. K. Jana, “Analysis of Weighting and Selection Methods for Pareto-Optimal Solutions of Multiobjective Optimization in Chemical Engineering Applications,” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, vol. 59, no. 33, pp. 14850–14867, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c00969.
  137. S. B. Kotsiantis, “Decision trees: a recent overview,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 261–283, Jun. 2011, doi: 10.1007/s10462-011-9272-4.
  138. T. L. Saaty, “An Exposition of the AHP in Reply to the Paper ‘Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process,’” Management Science, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 259–268, Mar. 1990, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.36.3.259.
  139. Y.-J. Gong et al., “Distributed evolutionary algorithms and their models: A survey of the state-of-the-art,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 34, pp. 286–300, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2015.04.061.
  140. P. Virtanen et al., “SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python,” Nature Methods, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 261–272, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2.
  141. H. Liao, Y. He, X. Wu, Z. Wu, and R. Bausys, “Reimagining multi-criterion decision making by data-driven methods based on machine learning: A literature review,” Information Fusion, vol. 100, p. 101970, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2023.101970.
  142. A. Pătrăușanu, A. Florea, M. Neghină, A. Dicoiu, and R. Chiș, “A Systematic Review of Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms Optimization Frameworks,” Processes, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 869, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.3390/pr12050869.
  143. S. Bandaru, A. H. C. Ng, and K. Deb, “Data mining methods for knowledge discovery in multi-objective optimization: Part A - Survey,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 70, pp. 139–159, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2016.10.015.
  144. T. G. Farr et al., “The Shuttle Radar Topography Mission,” Reviews of Geophysics, vol. 45, no. 2, May 2007, doi: 10.1029/2005rg000183.
  145. G. Calleja Rodríguez, A. Carrillo Andrés, F. Domínguez Muñoz, J. M. Cejudo López, and Y. Zhang, “Uncertainties and sensitivity analysis in building energy simulation using macroparameters,” Energy and Buildings, vol. 67, pp. 79–87, Dec. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.08.009.
  146. L. Zhu et al., “Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of cooling and heating loads for building energy planning,” Journal of Building Engineering, vol. 45, p. 103440, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103440.
  147. D. Blum et al., “Building optimization testing framework (BOPTEST) for simulation-based benchmarking of control strategies in buildings,” Journal of Building Performance Simulation, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 586–610, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1080/19401493.2021.1986574.
  148. C. J. Hopfe and J. L. M. Hensen, “Uncertainty analysis in building performance simulation for design support,” Energy and Buildings, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 2798–2805, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.06.034.
  149. S. M. Abdel Haleem, G. S. Pavlak, and W. P. Bahnfleth, “Performance of advanced control sequences in handling uncertainty in energy use and indoor environmental quality using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for control components,” Energy and Buildings, vol. 225, p. 110308, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110308.
CRediT Author Statement

The author reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Authors thanks to School of Science in Business Economics for this research support.

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Ethics Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Availability of Data and Materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Author Information

Contributions

All authors have equal contribution in the paper and all authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding Author



Rights and permissions

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

This license permits unrestricted use, sharing, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the source, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.

Copyright

© 2025 Aaron Mike Oquaye. The author(s) retain copyright of the work. The author(s) grant the Journal of Computer and Communication Networks (JCCN) and its publisher, Ansis Publications, the right of first publication and the right to identify itself as the original publisher of the article.

Cite this Article

Aaron Mike Oquaye, “Towards Integration of Multi Objective Optimization and Multi Criteria Decision Making”, Journal of Computer and Communication Networks, pp. 222-235, 2025, doi: 10.64026/JCCN/2025021.

Journals
JCCN JDBIM JSSF
Policies
Publication Ethics Copyright Policy Open Access Policy Article Posting Policy Advertising Policy Privacy Policy Data Availability Policy
Ethics
Conflicts of interest/Competing interests Allegations of Misconduct Appeals Process Complaints Process Peer Review Process Authorship Criteria Terms and Conditions
Resources
Digital Preservation Ansis ManuscriptHub Contact Us
Information
Authors Editors Librarians Societies Journal News
© Ansis Publications, All Right Reserved. Designed By Ansis Publications
Home About Us Resource Contact