Weight determination for consistently ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis

One of the most difficult tasks in multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is determining the weights of individual criteria so that all alternatives can be compared based on the aggregate performance of all criteria. This problem can be transformed into the compromise programming of seeking alternatives with a shorter distance to the ideal or a longer distance to the anti-ideal despite the rankings based on the two distance measures possibly not being the same. In order to obtain consistent rankings, this paper proposes a measure of relative distance, which involves the calculation of the relative position of an alternative between the anti-ideal and the ideal for ranking. In this case, minimizing the distance to the ideal is equivalent to maximizing the distance to the anti-ideal, so the rankings obtained from the two criteria are the same. An example is used to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed method, and the results are compared with those obtained from the TOPSIS method.