An Integrated Approach of SAW, TOPSIS, and RAM for Ranking Alternatives: A Case Study in the Food Industry
Received: 8 April 2025 | Revised: 20 April 2025 and 26 April 2025 | Accepted: 4 May 2025 | Online: 22 May 2025
Corresponding author: Bui Thi Thu Trang
Abstract
Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) stands as a widely employed technique for ranking alternatives and identifying the most suitable option across diverse domains. However, the inherent algorithmic variations among different MCDM methods can lead to discrepancies in the ranking outcomes when applied to the same problem. Consequently, to enhance the reliability of alternative rankings, it is crucial to address the problem using multiple distinct MCDM approaches. This study integrates three prominent methods: Simple Additive Weighting (SAW), Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and Root Assessment Method (RAM) to concurrently rank alternatives within a representative food-related example, specifically the nutritional value assessment of various nut types. The SAW, TOPSIS, and RAM methodologies were applied to rank eight types of nuts: almond, Brazil nut, cashew, hazelnut, macadamia, pecan, chestnut, and walnut, each characterized by nineteen distinct nutritional attributes. The results demonstrate a consistent identification of the top-ranked nut across all methods. Furthermore, the ranking order of the remaining alternatives exhibited minimal variation among the three approaches. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were 0.905 between SAW and TOPSIS, 0.929 between SAW and RAM, and 0.976 between TOPSIS and RAM. These findings not only offer valuable guidance for consumers in selecting the optimal nut product, but also provide a clear direction for practitioners to consider the combined application of these three MCDM methods for ranking alternatives in other fields.
Keywords:
MCDM, SAW, TOPSIS, RAM, nut-based foodsDownloads
References
I. Badi, M. B. Bouraima, and C. K. Kiptum, "Integrating Cultural Norms and Behavioral Risk Factors into Traffic Accident Mitigation: A Hybrid MCDM Approach for Libya," Mechatronics and Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 4, no. 1, Mar. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56578/mits040104
B. Yildirim and E. Ayyildiz, "Selecting the most suitable 3D printing technology for custom manufacturing using fuzzy decision-making methodology," International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), Mar. 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-025-02258-x
M. Baydaş, T. Eren, Ž. Stević, V. Starčević, and R. Parlakkaya, "Proposal for an objective binary benchmarking framework that validates each other for comparing MCDM methods through data analytics," PeerJ Computer Science, vol. 9, Apr. 2023, Art. no. e1350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.1350
D. D. Trung, B. Dudić, N.-T. Nguyen, and A. Ašonja, “Data Normalization for Root Assessment Methodology,” International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management,” vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 156 – 168, Jun. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24867/IJIEM-2024-2-354
S. H. Mian, E. Abouel Nasr, K. Moiduddin, M. Saleh, M. H. Abidi, and H. Alkhalefah, "Assessment of consolidative multi-criteria decision making (C-MCDM) algorithms for optimal mapping of polymer materials in additive manufacturing: A case study of orthotic application," Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 10, May 2024, Art. no e30867.
K. Ogrodnik, "Application of MCDM/MCDA methods in city rankings - review and comparative analysis," Economics and Environment, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 132–151, Dec. 2023.
J.-J. Wang, Y.-Y. Jing, C.-F. Zhang, and J.-H. Zhao, "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2263–2278, Dec. 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.06.021
T. V. Dua, "PSI-SAW and PSI-MARCOS Hybrid MCDM Methods," Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 15963–15968, Aug. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.7992
M. Azadfallah, "Incorporating Negative Values into the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Under Uncertain Conditions: An Applications in Project Manager Selection Problem," in International Program and Project Management — Best Practices in Selected Industries, vol. 31, K. D. Strang and N. R. Vajjhala, Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 277–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80275-1_12
V. Hiremani, R. M. Devadas, P. Gujjar, S. Johar, and S. R, "Ranking of Institutes Using MCDM SAW Method Under Uncertainty," in 2024 5th International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET), Belgaum, India, May 2024, pp. 1–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/INCET61516.2024.10593015
H. Taherdoost, "Analysis of Simple Additive Weighting Method (SAW) as a MultiAttribute Decision-Making Technique: A Step-by-Step Guide," Journal of Management Science & Engineering Research, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 21–24, Feb. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/jmser.v6i1.5400
T. Do, "Application of TOPSIS an PIV Methods for Multi - Criteria Decision Making in Hard Turning Process," Journal of Machine Engineering, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 57–71, Dec. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36897/jme/142599
Y. Çelikbilek and F. Tüysüz, "An in-depth review of theory of the TOPSIS method: An experimental analysis," Journal of Management Analytics, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 281–300, Apr. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2020.1748528
D. Duc Trung, "A combination method for multi-criteria decision making problem in turning process," Manufacturing Review, vol. 8, 2021, Art. no. 26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/mfreview/2021024
A. Sotoudeh-Anvari, "Root Assessment Method (RAM): A novel multi-criteria decision making method and its applications in sustainability challenges," Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 423, Oct. 2023, Art. no. 138695. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138695
D. D. Trung, "Using RAM method for optimal selection of flame retardant nanocomposite material fabrication solution," EPJ Applied Metamaterials, vol. 11, 2024, Art. no. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/epjam/2024005
D. Trung, D. Duc, N. Bao, and D. Thuy, "Using the root assessment method to choose the optimal solution for mushroom cultivation," Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, no. 00, pp. 7–7, 2024.
D. D. Trung, B. Dudić, H. T. Dung, and N. X. Truong, "Innovation in Financial Health Assessment: Applying MCDM Techniques to Banks in Vietnam," ECONOMICS, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 21–33, Aug. 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eoik-2024-0011
"Fundamental for preserving good health," Vinmec International Healthcare System. https://www.vinmec.com/vie.
N. N. A. Dao and N. A. Dao, "A Review of Soluble and Insoluble Fiber in Food," Journal of Industry and Trade, vol. 9, pp. 430–435, 2023.
N. M. Thuy, Textbook of Human Nutrition. Can Tho University, 2005.
"commonly employed for evaluating the nutritional composition of nut-based foods," Medlatec Medical service. https://medlatec.vn/.
"Nut-based foods," Vinmec International Healthcare System, https://www.vinmec.com/vie/bai-viet/cac-loai-hat-va-loi-ich-suc-khoe-voi-tre-em-vi.
"food categories that contain significant amounts of nutrients." https://vnexpress.net/8-loai-hat-giup-tang-tuoi-tho-4657561.html.
F. Ciardiello and A. Genovese, "A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods," Annals of Operations Research, vol. 325, no. 2, pp. 967–994, Jun. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w
S. Chakraborty, "TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis," Decision Analytics Journal, vol. 2, Mar. 2022, Art. no. 100021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2021.100021
"nutritional values for eight commonly consumed nut varieties." https://maccavip.com/vi/gia-tri-dinh-duong-cua-hat-macca.
S. H. Mian, E. Abouel Nasr, K. Moiduddin, M. Saleh, M. H. Abidi, and H. Alkhalefah, "Assessment of consolidative multi-criteria decision making (C-MCDM) algorithms for optimal mapping of polymer materials in additive manufacturing: A case study of orthotic application," Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 10, May 2024, Art. no. e30867. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30867
K. Ogrodnik, "Application of MCDM/MCDA methods in city rankings - review and comparative analysis," Economics and Environment, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 132–151, Dec. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34659/eis.2023.86.3.689
A. Puška, M. Nedeljković, D. Pamučar, D. Božanić, and V. Simić, "Application of the new simple weight calculation (SIWEC) method in the case study in the sales channels of agricultural products," MethodsX, vol. 13, Dec. 2024, Art. no. 102930. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2024.102930
R. V.Rao, and J. Lakshmi, “R-method: A simple ranking method for multi-attribute decision-making in the industrial environment,” Journal of Project Management, vol. 6, pp. 223–230, May. 2021, https://doi.org/10.5267/j.jpm.2021.5.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.jpm.2021.5.001
Downloads
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bui Thi Thu Trang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after its publication in ETASR with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
