Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfalls🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Decision-making›Rough-TOPSIS — Rough extension of TOPSIS
MCDMRankingrough

Rough-TOPSIS — Rough extension of TOPSIS

ROUGH-TOPSIS (Rough-TOPSIS — Rough extension of TOPSIS) is a ranking multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method introduced by Song, W. Ming, X. Wu, Z. in 2013. It turns a decision matrix of alternatives scored on multiple criteria into a structured, reproducible result.

ScholarGate
  1. MCDM
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

ROUGH-TOPSIS
AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC

When to use it

ROUGH-TOPSIS (Song, Ming & Wu 2013) is NOT standard TOPSIS adapted to rough numbers. It uses a deviation-coefficient approach: (1) PIS/NIS are crisp scalars from raw matrix bound extremes (no normalization); (2) rough deviation coefficients d+/d− are linear distances (not Euclidean); (3) deviations are normalized per criterion by column max upper bound; (4) separation measures S+/S− are rough intervals from weighted normalized deviations; (5) final CC uses α-defuzzification: S+*=(1-α)S+L+αS+U, S−*=αS−L+(1-α)S−U; CC=S−*/(S−*+S+*); rank descending. α=0.5 = moderate risk propensity.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Follows a transparent, reproducible computational procedure that can be audited step by step.
  • Handles multiple criteria of differing scales and units within a single decision matrix.
Limitations
  • May exhibit rank reversal when alternatives are added to or removed from the set.
  • Assumes full compensation — a strong score on one criterion can offset a weak score on another.

Sources

  1. Song, W., Ming, X., Wu, Z. (2013). An integrated rough number-based approach to design concept evaluation under subjective environments. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing DOI: 10.1080/09544828.2012.732994 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 2). Rough-TOPSIS — Rough extension of TOPSIS. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/rough-topsis

Related methods

AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • AHPDecision-making↔ compare
  • ANPDecision-making↔ compare
  • BWMDecision-making↔ compare
  • BWM-BAYESIANDecision-making↔ compare
  • CCSDDecision-making↔ compare
  • CILOSDecision-making↔ compare
  • CIMASDecision-making↔ compare
  • CRITICDecision-making↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

ROUGH-VIKORQR-TOPSISROUGH-MOORAROUGH-MABACROUGH-WASPASROUGH-COPRASGREY-TOPSISDHF-TOPSIS

Related reference concepts

Decision Support SystemsDecision MakingWeighted ScoresEvaluation CriteriaMultidimensional ScalingScoring Rubrics

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — ROUGH-TOPSIS (Rough-TOPSIS — Rough extension of TOPSIS). Retrieved 2026-07-20 from https://scholargate.app/en/decision-making/rough-topsis · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Song, W. Ming, X. Wu, Z.
Subfamily
Ranking
Year
2013
Type
Rough outranking/ranking — Rough number (lower approximation L, upper approximation U)
Value Space
rough
Uncertainty
epistemic
Compensation
full
Rank Reversal
Yes
Related methods
AHPANPBWMBWM-BAYESIANCCSDCILOSCIMASCRITIC
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account