Hello, and thank you for the excellent explanation. I'm curious as to why you chose number six while selecting attributes. Even numbers, according to Prof. Sati, are for intermediate importance, although I believe you prefer 6 times rank. If I'm mistaken, please correct me.
Thank you for message, I am not sure I understood your question, there are 7 criteria and 4 alternatives in the example explained. There may be some differences from the Prof. Satti's paper which is ok. You may follow Prof. Satti's original work as well.
@@Leprofesseur HI, when we have negative values in the alternatives, should we use the same logic in terms of beneficial and non-beneficial normalization.
Explained very Simply and in the best way... Thanks a lot, Sirji..
Thanks!
Very clear explanation. Can you please do a small example of a problem with sub-criteria? Thank you
Thank you so much!
Thank you sir, you explain clear and concise
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you so much for this video!
You are so welcome!
Hello, and thank you for the excellent explanation. I'm curious as to why you chose number six while selecting attributes. Even numbers, according to Prof. Sati, are for intermediate importance, although I believe you prefer 6 times rank. If I'm mistaken, please correct me.
Thank you for message, I am not sure I understood your question, there are 7 criteria and 4 alternatives in the example explained. There may be some differences from the Prof. Satti's paper which is ok. You may follow Prof. Satti's original work as well.
@@Leprofesseur HI, when we have negative values in the alternatives, should we use the same logic in terms of beneficial and non-beneficial normalization.
Take a difference, normalized values, could you elaborate more on how you are doing comparisons/calculation that you are getting negative values.