A Taxonomy and Review of The Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Literature in Chemical Engineering

Int. J. Multicriteria Decision Making, Vol. 1, No.
4, 2011 407
A taxonomy and review of the multiple criteria

decision-making literature in chemical engineering
Mohsen Pirdashti
Chemical Engineering Department,
Faculty of Engineering,
Shomal University,
Amol 46134, Iran
E-mail: pirdashti@shomal.ac.ir
Madjid Tavana*
Management Information Systems,
Lindback Distinguished Chair of Information Systems,
La Salle University,
Philadelphia, PA 19141, USA
Fax: 1-267-295-2854
E-mail: tavana@lasalle.edu
*Corresponding author
Mimi Haryani Hassim

Department of Biotechnology and Chemical Technology,
Aalto University School of Science and Technology,
FIN-02015 HUT, Finland
E-mail: mimi@cheme.utm.my
Majid Behzadian
Industrial Engineering Department,
Faculty of Engineering,
Shomal University,
Amol 46134, Iran
E-mail: m.behzadian@shomal.ac.ir
I.A. Karimi
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering,
National University of Singapore,
117576, Singapore
E-mail: cheiak@nus.edu.sg
Copyright © 2011 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

408 M. Pirdashti et al.
Abstract: Many situations and problems in the chemical and related industries
involve complex decision-making demanding discerning abilities and methods.
Multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) tools and methods have been
widely used to solve chemical engineering (CE) problems that involve
conflicting and multiple objectives of diverse types. The main aims of this
contribution are to:
1 explain and compare the most common MCDM methods

2 present and classify more than 300 published papers related to the
application of MCDM in CE.
The various MCDM publications are classified based on the application area,
decision context, and journal and year of publication to highlight the trends
over the past three decades. This article can serve as a complete state-of-the-art
reference for chemical engineers and it highlights the potential applications of
MCDM in CE problems.
Keywords: multicriteria decision-making; MCDM; decision support system;

multi-objective optimisation; chemical engineering; CE.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Pirdashti, M., Tavana, M.,
Hassim, M.H., Behzadian, M. and Karimi, I.A. (2011) ‘A taxonomy and review
of the multiple criteria decision-making literature in chemical engineering’,
Int. J. Multicriteria Decision Making, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.407–467.
Biographical notes: Mohsen Pirdashti is a Faculty of Engineering in the

Chemical Engineering Department at Shomal University in Iran. He received
his BSc in Chemical Engineering from Mohaghegh Ardebili University and
MSc in Chemical Engineering from Razi University in Iran. His research
interests include strategic management, decision support systems, modelling
and optimisation processes, and multicriteria decision analysis. He has
published in Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, International Journal of
Applied Decision Science, Iranian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Journal
of Agriculture Science and Technology International Journal of Industrial
Engineering and Technology.
Madjid Tavana is a Professor of Management Information Systems and

Decision Sciences and the Lindback Distinguished Chair of Information
Systems at La Salle University where he served as the Chairman of the
Management Department and the Director of the Center for Technology and
Management. He has been a Distinguished Research Fellow at NASA’s
Kennedy Space Center, NASA’s Johnson Space Center, Naval Research
Laboratory – Stennis Space Center, and Air Force Research Laboratory. He
was awarded the prestigious Space Act Award by NASA in 2005. He holds an
MBA, PMIS, and PhD in Management Information Systems. He received his
Post-Doctoral Diploma in Strategic Information Systems from the Wharton
School of the University of Pennsylvania. He is the Editor-in-Chief for the
International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences, the International Journal
of Enterprise Information Systems, and the International Journal of Applied
Decision Sciences. He has published in journals such as Decision Sciences,
Interfaces, Information Systems, Annals of Operations Research, Information
and Management, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Computers and
Operations Research, and Advances in Engineering Software, among others.
A taxonomy and review of the multiple criteria decision-making literature 409
Mimi Haryani Hassim is a Chemical Engineering Lecturer at Universiti

Teknologi Malaysia. She received her BEng in Chemical Engineering from
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, MSc in Advanced Process Engineering from
Loughborough University in UK and Doctor of Science (Technology) from
Aalto University in Finland. Her main research interests are inherent
occupational health and inherent safety in chemical processes. She also studies
process development and design, multicriteria decision-making, industrial
hygiene, and process safety and loss prevention. She is the author of more than
ten published and forthcoming articles in international and national journals in
the field of chemical engineering. She also establishes international
collaboration with researchers from Finland, Canada, UK, USA, Iran, and
Singapore.
Majid Behzadian is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Industrial

Engineering at Shomal University. He received his MS and PhD in Industrial
Engineering from Tarbiat Modares University. His current research interests
include product design and development, multicriteria decision-making, and
strategy deployment. He has published two books and several journal
publications. He is an ad hoc reviewer for the European Journal of Operational
Research, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Applied Mathematical
Modelling, International Journal of Energy Sector Management, among others.
I.A. Karimi is a Professor in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular

Engineering at National University of Singapore. He received his PhD
from Purdue University in Chemical Engineering. He has published
extensively in the area of process systems engineering, and has led several
industry-collaborative research and consulting projects with several local
chemical and logistics companies and agencies. He won an IBM faculty
development award in 1985 and DuPont’s Best Manufacturing Technology
award in 1994. He was also a co-recipient of the 1991 Corcoran award for the
Best Paper in Chemical Engineering Education (ASEE) journal and 2002 Best
Paper Award of Computers and Chemical Engineering. His current research
interests include energy systems, supply chain management, chemical logistics,
planning and scheduling, and systems biology.
1 Introduction
Chemical engineering (CE) can be broadly defined as the branch of engineering that
deals with the application of sciences (e.g., Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics) to the
process of converting raw materials or chemicals into more valuable products in an
economical and sustainable manner (i.e., simultaneously managing resources, protecting
the environment and controlling health and safety procedures) (Favre et al., 2002, 2008).
CE is no longer a simple application of a classical discipline. It has to take up industrial
and economic challenges besides coping with constraints imposed on processes by their
natural and social environment (Villermaux, 1993). CE has a long tradition and proven
methodology of process design with emphasis on the continuous production of
huge-volume commodity chemicals (low value-added small molecules).
Nowadays, chemical and related industries are getting increasingly involved in

specialty chemicals (small-volume, batch production, high value-added) as well as
formulated products (complex mixtures to confer specific end-use properties). Besides
process design and optimisation which are the major concerns of commodity production,
the specialty and formulated product industries also encounter new technical as well as
marketing challenges (time to market, smart product design, choice or adaptation of
generic, not dedicated plants, etc.). Furthermore, in place of the classical unit operations
used in commodity production (e.g., distillation, absorption and extraction), more exotic
operations such as emulsification, spray cooling, extrusion, coating and granulation are
relevant to the manufacturing process (Favre et al., 2002). CE is a vital discipline of
diverse industries including petrochemicals, oil and gas industries, manufacturing,
pharmaceuticals, healthcare, design and construction, pulp and paper, food processing,
specialty chemicals, polymers, biotechnology, and environmental health and safety,
among others.
In developing a chemical process, it is critical to design a process that will best meet
the desired goal in the most economical, technically feasible and sustainable way. The
ability to make sound decisions on multiple aspects (e.g., technical, economic, ethical,
social, environmental) is pivotal to successful chemical industry project management
(i.e., what and how products should be made? What will they be used for? What are the
new raw materials and better methods for producing them? What is its impact on the
environment? How sustainable is it?). Searching for the optimal configuration, design,
and operation are major goals in process development. A variety of criteria can and have
been used in benchmarking a process. These can be classified under three categories
covering various aspects in industrial decision-making; economy and profitability,
safety-health-environment (SHE) and technological efficiency (Tuomaala et al., 2001).
Since no single criterion captures all three aspects fully, and the plethora of criteria for an
overall optimum process cannot be combined in the same objective function (Cziner
et al., 2005), a comprehensive process necessitates the need for decision-making in a
multicriteria setting.
Multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) tools and methods have been widely
used to solve CE problems involving conflicting and multiple objectives. Evaluation
problems and design problems are two types of problems that are commonly modelled
and solved with MCDM in CE (Steuer and Na, 2003). The evaluation problem is
concerned with the assessment of a set of discretely defined alternatives. Meanwhile, the
design problem is concerned with the identification of a preferred alternative from a
potentially infinite set of alternatives implicitly defined by a set of constraints (Al-Subhi
Al-Harbi, 2001).
In this paper, we review more than 300 published papers related to the application of
MCDM in CE. We classify, compare, contrast, and analyse the various MCDM methods
utilised in these studies based on the application areas, decision context, and journal and
year of publication to highlight the trends. Our aim is to provide a state-of-the-art
reference for chemical engineers and promote the application of MCDM in CE. This
paper is organised into four sections. Section 2 presents an overview of MCDM methods.
Section 3 presents our review of the literature on MCDM applications in CE. Finally,
Section 4 concludes with future research directions.
2 Overview of MCDM methods
The MCDM methods are frequently used to solve real world problems with multiple,
conflicting, and incommensurate criteria. MCDM problems are generally categorised as
continuous or discrete, depending on the domain of alternatives. Hwang and Yoon (1981)
have classified the MCDM methods into two categories: multi-objective decision-making
(MODM) and multi-attribute decision-making (MADM). MODM has been widely
studied by means of mathematical programming methods with well-formulated
theoretical frameworks. MODM methods have decision variable values that are
determined in a continuous or integer domain with either an infinitive or a large number
of alternative choices, the best of which should satisfy the DM constraints and preference
priorities (Hwang and Masud, 1979; Ehrgott and Wiecek, 2005). MADM methods, on the
other hand, have been used to solve problems with discrete decision spaces and a
predetermined or a limited number of alternative choices. The MADM solution process
requires inter and intra-attribute comparisons and involves implicit or explicit tradeoffs
(Hwang and Yoon, 1981). Figure 1 shows the MCDM classification used in this study.
Figure 1 The MCDM classification used in this study (see online version for colours)
MOMP
2.1.1
GP
2.1.2
MODM
2.1 GA
2.1.3.1
SA
2.1.3.2
EA
2.1.3
TS
2.1.3.3
MCDM
2.0 MODE
2.1.3.4
AHP
2.2.1
PROMETHEE
2.2.2
MADM TOPSIS
2.2 2.2.3
MAU(V)T
2.2.4
ELECTRE
2.2.5
2.1 Multi-objective decision-making

Most real-life decision problems involve multiple and conflicting objectives, sometimes
subject to certain constraints. MODM is commonly used to solve these problems
characterised by multiple and conflicting objective functions such as maximising
performance while minimising fuel consumption of a vehicle simultaneously over a
feasible set of decisions. An MODM model considers a vector of decision variables,
objective functions, and constraints (Chankong and Haimes, 1983; Ehrgott and
Wiecek, 2005; Hwang and Masud, 1979; Kahraman and Kaya, 2008). The goal is to
optimise the objective functions, while the DMs choose a solution among a set of
efficient solutions since MODM problems rarely have a unique solution (Zhang et al.,
2007).
One of the most challenging problems in MODM applications is related to the
identification or approximation of a family of points known as the Pareto-optimal set
(Ehrgott, 2005). Pareto optimality is a measure of efficiency in multi-objective
optimisation. A large number of methods have been proposed to generate the Pareto
optimal set in the literature. These methods vary from simple approaches, requiring very
little information, to the methods based on mathematical programming techniques,
requiring extensive information on each objective and the preferences of the DMs. There
is no ‘one size fits all’ methodology for MODM problems. A method that works well in
theory can fail in practice, one that works well on some problems may not be suitable for
others. The majority of MODM methods fall into two broad categories: those employing
mathematical programming techniques and those using evolutionary algorithms (EA).
Next, we describe the most widely used MODM methods in CE.
2.1.1 Multi-objective mathematical programming (MOMP)
The central issue in MOMP is the direct involvement of the DM in the process of
searching for the best compromise solution on the basis of the individual preferences. A
number of MOMP models and categories have been proposed since the early 70s. In
MOMP, a set of linear functions are optimised subject to a series of linear constraints.
When at least one objective function or constraint function is non-linear, we get a
multi-objective non-linear programming problem. The MOMP becomes a convex
problem, when all the objective functions and the constraint set are convex and
non-convex optimisation problem, when at least one objective function or the constraint
set is non-convex (Chinchuluun and Pardalos, 2007).
The methods for solving MOMP problems are also classified as a priori methods,
interactive methods, and a posteriori methods (Hwang and Masud, 1979). In a priori
methods, the DM expresses his/her preferences before the solution process (e.g., setting
goals or weights for the objective functions). In interactive methods, the dialogue phase
with the DM is interchanged with the calculation phase and the process usually converges
after a few iterations to the most preferred solution. In a posteriori methods, the efficient
solutions (all of them or a sufficient number of them) are generated before the DM
intervenes and selects the most preferred solution.
2.1.2 Goal programming (GP)

The GP, which was first suggested by Charnes et al. (1955) and Charnes and Cooper
(1961), is an analytical method devised to tackle decision-making problems where goals
are assigned to multiple, possibly conflicting attributes, and where the DM seeks a
satisfactory and sufficient solution by minimising the non-achievement of the
corresponding goals. There are several classes of GP depending on the nature of the goal
functions, decision variables, and coefficients. For example, goal functions may be linear
or non-linear; decision variables may be continuous, discrete, or mixed; and coefficients
may be deterministic, stochastic, or fuzzy. Surveys of GP are available in the works by
Schniederjans (1995), and Zanakis and Gupta (1985).
2.1.3 Evolutionary algorithms

Finding the global optima in many real-life MOMP problems is a difficult task, especially
when the search space has local extrema. Indeed, such problems often involve large and
complex search spaces, multiple conflicting objective functions, and a host of
uncertainties that require consideration. The EAs, such as genetic algorithms (GA),
simulated annealing (SA), tabu search (TS), and multi-objective differential evolution
(MODE) are natural candidates for solving these problems and are preferable to the
MOMP methods because of their simplicity, flexibility, ease of operation, minimal
requirements, and global perspective (Oduguwa et al., 2005). The EAs operate on a
population of potential solutions based on two principles: selection and variation. While
selection mimics, the competition for reproduction and resources among living beings,
variation imitates the natural capability of creating new living beings by means of
recombination and mutation (Shen et al., 2010). Multi-objective EAs have received
tremendous attention in recent years (Ahn, 2006; Abraham et al., 2005).
2.1.3.1 Genetic algorithm

The GA is the most popular local search method in the EA literature. The optimisation
and search technique in GA is based on the principles of genetics and natural selection.
GA is a probabilistic search method that employs search techniques inspired by Darwin’s
evolutionary theory of natural selection and the survival of the fittest. It allows a
population composed of many individuals to evolve under pre-specified selection rules to
a state that maximises the fitness (Haupt and Haupt, 2004). The method was developed
by Holland (1975) and later popularised by one of his students, Goldberg (1989). It
employs a random yet directed search for finding the global optimal solution without
requiring the derivative of the objective function. In addition, the search is not biased
towards any locally optimal solution. In contrast to random sampling algorithms, GA has
the ability to direct the search towards relatively promising regions in the problem’s
search space. In addition, it has been empirically proven very effective in solving a large
number of complex combinatorial optimisation problems (Holland, 1975; Goldberg,
1989).
2.1.3.2 Simulated annealing
The SA is a generic probabilistic meta-heuristic model used to find the global

optimisation in multicriteria problems with discrete search space, namely locating a good
approximation to the global optimum of a given function in a large search space
(Bertsimas and Tsitsiklis, 1993). The name of the method and the inspiration come from
annealing in metallurgy, a technique involving heating and controlled cooling of a
material to increase the size of its crystals and reduce their defects (Cerny, 1985;
Kirkpatrick et al., 1983).
Each step of the SA algorithm replaces the current solution by a random ‘nearby’
solution, chosen with a probability that depends both on the difference between the
corresponding function values and also on a global parameter (called the temperature),
that is gradually decreased during the process. The dependency is such that the current
solution changes almost randomly when the temperature is high, but increasingly
‘downhill’ as the temperature moves towards zero. The allowance for ‘uphill’ moves
saves the method from becoming stuck at local optima – which are the bane of greedier
methods.
2.1.3.3 Tabu search

The TS is a meta-heuristic algorithm that belongs to the class of local search techniques
and can be used to solve combinatorial optimisation problems. TS enhances the
performance of a local search method by using memory structures. Once a potential
solution has been determined, it is marked as ‘tabu’ so that the algorithm does not visit
that solution repeatedly (Glover, 1989). The TS uses a local or neighbourhood search
procedure to iteratively move from one solution to another until some stopping criterion
has been satisfied. The TS modifies the neighbourhood structure of each solution as the
search progresses to explore regions of the search space that would be left unexplored by
the local search procedure (Glover and Laguna, 1997).
2.1.3.4 Multi-objective differential evolution

The MODE, which was first suggested by Xue et al. (2003), is a simple population-based,
direct-search algorithm for global optimisation (Storn and Price, 1997). MODE has
already proved itself as a promising candidate in the field of evolutionary multi-objective
optimisation (Coello et al., 2007; Deb, 2001; Zitzler and Thiele, 1999). In this algorithm,
the best individual is adopted to create the offspring and a Pareto-based approach is
used to implement the selection of the best individual. If a solution is dominated, a set of
non-dominated individuals can be identified and the ‘best’ turns out to be any individual
randomly picked from this set (Xue et al., 2003).
2.2 Multi-attribute decision-making

MADM methods are used for circumstances that necessitate the consideration of
different options that cannot be measured in a single dimension. Each method provides a
different approach for selecting the best among several pre-selected alternatives
(Janic and Reggiani, 2002). The MADM methods help DMs learn about the issues they
face, the value systems of their own and other parties, and the organisational values and
objectives that will consequently guide them in identifying a preferred course of action.
The primary goal in MADM is to provide a set of attribute-aggregation methodologies
for considering the preferences and judgements of DMs (Doumpos and Zopounidis,
2002). Roy (1990) argues that solving MADM problems is not searching for an optimal
solution, but rather helping DMs master the complex judgements and data involved in
their problems and advance towards an acceptable solution. Multi-attributes analysis is
not an off-the-shelf recipe that can be applied to every problem and situation. The
development of MADM models has often been dictated by real-life problems. Therefore,
it is not surprising that methods have appeared in a rather diffuse way, without any clear
general methodology or basic theory (Vincke, 1992). The selection of a MADM
framework or method should be done carefully according to the nature of the problem,
types of choices, measurement scales, dependency among the attributes, type of
uncertainty, expectations of the DMs, and quantity and quality of the available data and
judgements (Vincke, 1992). Finding the ‘best’ MADM framework is an elusive goal that
may never be reached (Triantaphyllou, 2000). Next, we describe the most widely used
MADM methods in CE.
2.2.1 Analytical hierarchy process (AHP)
AHP is a MADM approach that simplifies complex and ill-structured problems by

arranging the decision attributes and alternatives in a hierarchical structure with the help
of a series of pairwise comparisons. AHP can be a powerful tool for comparing
alternative evaluation systems and design concepts in CE. Dyer and Forman (1992)
describe the advantages of AHP in a group setting as follows:
1 the discussion focuses on both tangibles and intangibles, individual and shared
values
2 the discussion can be focused on objectives rather than alternatives
3 the discussion can be structured so that every attribute can be considered in turn
4 the discussion continues until all relevant information has been considered and a
consensus choice of the decision alternative is achieved.
Saaty (2000) argues that a DM naturally finds it easier to compare two things than to
compare all things together in a list. AHP also examines the consistency of the DMs and
allows for the revision of their responses. AHP has been applied to many diverse
decisions because of the intuitive nature of the process and its power in resolving
the complexity in a judgemental problem. A comprehensive list of the major applications
of AHP, along with a description of the method and its axioms, can be found in
Saaty (1994, 2000), Weiss and Rao (1987), and Zahedi (1986). AHP has proven to be a
popular technique for determining weights in multi-attribute problems (Shim, 1989;
Zahedi, 1986). The importance of AHP and the use of pairwise comparisons in
decision-making are best illustrated in the more than 1,000 references cited in Saaty
(2000).
The main advantage of AHP is its ability to rank alternatives in the order of their
effectiveness in meeting conflicting objectives. AHP calculations are not complex, and if
the judgements made about the relative importance of the attributes have been made in
good faith, then AHP calculations lead inexorably to the logical consequence of those
judgements. AHP has been a controversial technique in the operations research
community. Harker and Vargas (1990) show that AHP does have an axiomatic
foundation, the cardinal measurement of preferences is fully represented by the
eigenvector method, and the principles of hierarchical composition and rank reversal are
valid. On the other hand, Dyer (1990a, 1990b) has questioned the theoretical basis
underlying AHP and argues that it can lead to preference reversals based on the
alternative set being analysed. In response, Saaty (1990) contends that rank reversal is a
positive feature, when new reference points are introduced.
2.2.2 Preference ranking organisation method for enrichment evaluation

(PROMETHEE)
The PROMETHEE family of outranking methods was first introduced by Brans (1982) in
the form of partial ranking of alternatives (PROMETHEE I). Subsequently, the method
was extended by Brans and Vincke (1985) to a full ranking approach, which is
presently known as PROMETHEE II. A few years later, several versions of the
PROMETHEE methods such as PROMETHEE III, IV, V, and VI were developed to help
with more complicated decision-making situations (Brans and Mareschal, 2005). The
PROMETHEE methods have been successfully applied to various fields, including
environment management (Martin et al., 2003; Queiruga et al., 2008), hydrology and
water management (Pudenz et al., 2002; Hermans et al., 2007), and energy management
(Goletsis et al., 2003; Madlener et al., 2007).
Among the family of PROMETHEE method, PROMETHEE II is fundamental to
the implementation of the other PROMETHEE methods (Behzadian et al., 2010).
The central principle of PROMETHEE II is based on the pairwise comparison of
alternatives along each attribute that is to be maximised or minimised. The
implementation of PROMETHEE II requires relevant information concerning the
weights and preference function of the attributes. For each attribute, the preference
function translates the difference between the evaluations obtained by two alternatives
into a preference degree ranging from 0 to 1. In order to facilitate the selection of a
specific preference function, Brans and Vincke (1985) proposed six basic types, namely:
usual attribute, U-shape attribute, V-shape attribute, level attribute, V-shape with
indifference attribute, and Gaussian attribute. These six types are particularly easy to
define.
PROMETHEE takes into account the amplitude of the deviations between the
evaluations of the alternatives within each attribute, eliminates the scaling effects
completely, reduces the number of incomparabilities, provides information on the
conflicting nature of the attributes, and offers sensitivity tools to test easily different sets
of weights (Brans and Mareschal, 2005). Gilliams et al. (2005) have shown that
PROMETHEE II is slightly preferable to both ELECTRE III and AHP, based on user
friendliness, simplicity of the model strategy, variation of the solution, and
implementation. Al-Shemmeri et al. (1997) have shown that PROMETHEE is easier than
ELECTRE III to understand by the DMs and simpler to manage by the analysts. Despite
its distinct advantages, the great weaknesses of PROMETHEE are its structuring of the
decision problem and determination of the weights (Macharis et al., 2004).
2.2.3 The technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solutions

(TOPSIS)
The TOPSIS method was initially presented by Hwang and Yoon (1981). It has been
applied to a large number of application cases in advanced manufacturing (Agrawal et al.,
1991; Parkan and Wu, 1999), purchasing and outsourcing (Shyura and Shih, 2006;
Kahraman et al., 2009), and financial performance measurement (Feng and Wang, 2001).
Its basic principle is that the chosen alternatives should have the shortest distance from
the ideal solution and the farthest distance from the negative-ideal solution (Lai et al.,
1994; Yoon and Hwang, 1995).
TOPSIS has been shown to be one of the best MADM methods in addressing the rank
reversal issue, which is the change in the ranking of alternatives when a non-optimal
alternative is introduced (Zanakis et al., 1998). This consistency feature is largely
appreciated in practical applications. Moreover, the rank reversal in TOPSIS is
insensitive to the number of alternatives and has its worst performance only in the case of
very limited number of attributes (Zanakis et al., 1998; Triantaphyllou and Lin, 1996). A
relative advantage of TOPSIS is its ability to identify the best alternative quickly (Paxkan
and Wu, 1997). TOPSIS was found to perform better than AHP in matching a base
prediction model. When there were few attributes, TOPSIS had proportionately more
rank reversals. When there were many attributes, TOPSIS differed more from simple
additive weight results. TOPSIS performed less accurately than AHP on both selecting
the top ranked alternative and in matching all ranks of the simulation comparison (Olson,
2004).
2.2.4 Multiple attribute utility (value) theory [MAU(V)T]

The MAUT, developed by Keeney and Raiffa (1993), is a systematic method for
identifying and analysing multiple variables to provide a common basis for arriving at a
decision. The key element in MAUT is to derive a multi-attribute utility function for
which single utility functions and their weighting factors are necessary. Since its
development, various applications of the MAUT have been reported in many real
decision-making problems such as the selection of an energy resource (Abouelnaga et al.,
2009), risk ranking of natural gas pipelines (Brito and deAlmeida, 2009), evaluation of
public risk preferences in forest land-use choices (Ananda and Herath, 2005), and
selection of the best scenario for the radioactive substances exposed to the environment
(Hwang, 2004).
Utility independence is a central concept in MAUT. Various utility-independence
conditions imply specific forms of utility functions; however, only additive and
multiplicative forms are generally used in practice.
MAUT enables the DM to incorporate preference and value trade-offs for each metric
and measure the relative importance of each attribute (Keeney and Raiffa, 1993). It is
easy to understand and explain to DMs and provides a more practical methodology due to
an easier computational analysis (Collins et al., 2006). The judgements in MAUT are
made explicitly. Its value information can be used in many ways to help clarify a decision
process, and DMs, typically learn a great deal through these joint efforts to construct their
views on their preferences. However, the determination of the maximum and minimum
ranges of the attributes and deriving work of the utility functions require a lot of time and
effort in the MAUT (Kim and Song, 2009).
2.2.5 Elimination and choice translating reality (ELECTRE)

The ELECTRE method is a family of outranking methods developed by Roy (1973) to
rank a set of alternatives. Soon after the introduction of the first version known as
ELECTRE I, this approach has evolved into a number of variants. Today, the most
widely used versions are known as ELECTRE II and ELECTRE III (Wang and
Triantaphyllou, 2008). ELECTRE is a procedure that sequentially reduces the number of
alternatives the DM is faced with in a set of non-dominated alternatives. The ELECTRE
method is especially well-known in Europe. It has been extensively applied in many real
application cases, including environment management (Rogers and Bruen, 1998; Hobbs
and Meier, 2000), education system (Giannoulis and Ishizaka, 2009), water resources
planning (Anand, 1995), and waste management (Hokkanen and Salminen, 1997).
The ELECTRE approach has a long history of successful practical applications in
various problem domains (Achillas et al., 2010). With the ELECTRE, the DM is able to
take into account either quantitative or qualitative attributes (Achillas et al., 2010).
ELECTRE is quick, operates with simple logic, and has the strength of being able to
detect the presence of incomparability; it uses a systematic computational procedure, an
advantage of which is an absence of strong axiomatic assumptions (Shanian and
Savadogo, 2006). While the applications of ELECTRE are well-documented in the
literature, many authors have identified the allocation of weights as a major shortcoming
of the method (Rogers and Bruen, 1998). In ELECTRE, similar to PROMETHEE,
differences in attribute values are not taken into account totally; it does not matter how
much as attribute value is better than that of another attribute (Salminen et al., 1998).
3 MCDM applications in CE
In this section, we classify 351 published papers related to the application of MCDM in
CE. Table 1 presents a complete listing of these papers.
Figure 2 presents a classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the
utilised methodology. As shown in this figure, GA is the most widely used MODM
method in CE with 64 papers (18.23%) papers reported using this method in the
literature. As for MADM, AHP and PROMETHEE are the most widely used methods in
CE. AHP was utilised in 46 papers (13.11%) while PROMETHEE was used in 37 papers
(10.54%).
Figure 3 presents a classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the
application area. As shown in this figure, MCDM has been most widely applied to
environmental health and safety. 88 papers (25.07%) reported using this method in the
literature. Other widely applied domain included oil and gas industry (47 papers or
13.39%), fuel and energy (45 papers or 12.82%), polymer industry (39 papers or
11.11%), food industry (21 papers or 5.98%), biotechnology (19 papers or 5.41%),
mineral and metallurgical industry (13 papers or 3.70%), and cellular industry (12 papers
or 3.42%).
We also studied the criteria used in different application areas of CE. Process
development and operations management have nowadays become more challenging due
to the increasing number of the objective functions and criteria. Economic, efficiency,
safety, health, and environmental friendliness were among the most discussed criteria in
the literature.
No. Application area Methods Decision context Journals Citations
1 Food industry MOMP Thermal sterilisation of packaged Journal of Food Science Abakarov et al. (2009) Table 1
foods decisions
2 Fuel and energy MAUT Energy resource planning Nuclear Engineering and Design Abouelnaga et al. (2009)
decisions
3 Polymer industry GA High-pressure tubular reactor Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Agrawal et al. (2006)
decisions Research
4 (Others) general AHP Batch plant design decisions Computers and Operations Research Aguilar-Lasserre et al. (2009)
5 Environmental health and AHP Emission control decisions World Review of Science, Technology and Al-Gharib et al. (2007)
safety Sustainable Development
6 Environmental health and MCDM Nitrate contamination decisions Journal of Environmental Management Almasri and Kaluarachchi
safety (2005)
7 Oil and gas industry MOMP Petrochemical industry decisions Chemical Engineering Research and Al-Sharrah et al. (2006)
Design
8 Environmental health and GA Waste management decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Anderson et al. (2005)
safety
9 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Textile wastewater decisions Journal of Hazardous Materials Aragones-Beltran et al.
A classification of the MCDM papers in CE
safety (2009)
10 Environmental health and GA Scheduling decisions Journal of Cleaner Production Arbiza et al. (2008)
safety
11 Environmental health and AHP Chemical tanker cargo operation Process Safety and Environmental Arslan (2009)
safety decisions Protection
12 (Others) general GA Turbojet engine cycle decisions International Journal of Thermal Atashkari et al. (2005)
Sciences
13 Mineral and metallurgical TOPSIS Coating selection decisions Expert Systems with Applications Athanasopoulos et al. (2009)
industry
14 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear waste storage decisions Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Atherton and French (1998)
safety Analysis
A taxonomy and review of the multiple criteria decision-making literature
15 Oil and gas industry MCDM Risk management decisions Reliability Engineering and System Safety Aven et al. (2007)
16 Biotechnology PROMETHEE Ranking organotin compounds Applied Organometallic Chemistry Ayoko et al. (2003)
decisions
419
420
17 Environmental health and MCDM Air quality decisions Environmental Science and Technology Ayoko et al. (2004) Table 1
safety
18 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Water quality decisions Journal of Hydrology Ayoko et al. (2007)
safety
19 (Others) general DE Adiabatic styrene reactor analysis Chemical Engineering Science Babu et al. (2005)
decisions
20 Polymer industry DE Terephthalate reactor decisions Materials and Manufacturing Processes Babu et al. (2007)
M. Pirdashti et al.
21 Environmental health and MCDM Location planning decisions European Journal of Operational Barda et al. (1990)
safety Research
22 (Others) general MCDM Chemical process decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Basson and Petrie (2007)
23 Cellular industry MCDM Group technology decisions International Journal of Production Baykasoglu and Gindy
Research (2000)
24 Fuel and energy ELECTRE Energy diffusion decisions Renewable Energy Beccali et al. (2003)
25 Fuel and energy MODM Energy network decisions Energy Policy Beck et al. (2008)
26 Oil and gas industry MCDM Oil industry maintenance Reliability Engineering and System Safety Bertolini and Bevilacqua
decisions (2006)
27 Environmental health and MAUT Nuclear emergency decisions International Journal of Energy Sector Bertsch et al. (2007)
safety Management
28 Food industry AHP Blanching-freezing decisions Journal of Food Engineering Bevilacqua et al. (2004)
A classification of the MCDM papers in CE (continued)
29 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Air quality decisions Omega Beynon and Wells (2008)
safety
30 (Others) general MODM Review of MOO in chemical Reviews in Chemical Engineering Bhaskar et al. (2000)
engineering
31 Polymer industry GA Poly (ethylene terephthalate) Computers and Chemical Engineering Bhaskar et al. (2001)
reactor decisions
32 Oil and gas industry GA Hydrocracking unit decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Bhutani et al. (2006a)
Research
33 Oil and gas industry GA Planning and optimisation Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Bhutani et al. (2006b)
decisions Research
34 Environmental health and GA Wastewater treatment decisions Engineering Optimization Biswas et al. (2007) Table 1
safety
35 Environmental health and ELECTRE Landfill treatment decisions Omega Bollinger and Pictet (2008)
safety
36 Environmental health and MCDM Toxic chemical decisions Environmental Modeling and Software Booty et al. (2005)
safety
37 Cellular industry AHP Material handling decisions Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Braglia et al. (2001)
Analysis
38 Environmental health and MCDM Environment impact decisions Environmental Modeling and Software Bruggemann et al. (2008)
safety
39 Environmental health and MCDM Hazardous materials decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Cameron (2000)
safety
40 (Others) general PROMETHEE Oil spill decisions Journal of Colloid and Interface Science Carmody et al. (2007)
41 (Others) general PROMETHEE Kaolinite surface infrared spectra Applied Spectroscopy Carmody et al. (2006)
decisions
42 (Others) general PROMETHEE Modified kaolinite decisions Journal of Colloid and Interface Science Carmody et al. (2005)
43 (Others) general TS Plant process design decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Cavin et al. (2004)
44 Environmental health and EA Gradient separation decisions Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Cela et al. (2003)
safety Systems
45 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Nuclear dump site evaluation European Journal of Operational Chabchoub and Martel
safety decisions Research (2004)

46 Oil and gas industry MCDM Petroleum production and Expert Systems with Applications Chan (2005)
separation decisions
47 Oil and gas industry MCDM Membrane gas separation Chemical Engineering Science Chang and Hou (2006)
decisions
48 Biotechnology MCDM Technology transfer decisions Fuzzy Sets and Systems Chang and Chen (1994)
49 Environmental health and MCDM Watershed pollution decisions Journal of the American Water Resources Chen and Chang (2006)
safety Association
50 Fuel and energy GA Catalyst design decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Cheng et al. (2010)
Research
421
422
51 Fuel and energy GA Catalyst design decisions Chemical Engineering Science Cheng et al. (2008) Table 1
52 Fuel and energy GA Gas turbine engine decisions IEEE Transactions on Industrial Chipperfield and Fleming
Electronics (1996)
53 Fuel and energy MCDM Wide envelope controller IEEE Transactions on Industrial Chipperfield et al. (2002)
decisions Electronics
54 Environmental health and MADM Land-use planning decisions Journal of Hazardous Materials Christou and Mattarelli
safety (2000)
55 Fuel and energy AHP Hydrogen technology decisions Energy and Fuels Chui et al. (2006)
M. Pirdashti et al.
56 Environmental health and MODM Waste management decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Ciric and Huchette (1993)
safety Research
57 Polymer industry GA Single screw extrusion inverse Polymer Engineering and Science Covas et al. (1999)
decisions
58 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Steel rolling decisions Computers and Industrial Engineering Cowling (2003)
industry
59 Polymer industry MCDM Polymer extrusion decisions IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Cunha et al. (1998)
Business and Industry
60 Polymer industry GA Polymerisation process decisions Journal of Applied Polymer Science Curteanu et al. (2006)
61 (Others) general AHP Process evaluation decisions Computer-Aided Chemical Engineering Cziner and Hurme (2003)
62 Environmental health and MCDM Chemical separation decisions Computer-Aided Chemical Engineering Cziner et al. (2006)
safety
63 Fuel and energy MCDM Capital budgeting decisions Control and Cybernetics Czyzak and Jaszkiewicz
(1996)
64 Environmental health and MODM Waste management decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Dantus and High (1999)
safety
65 Pharmacy industry MCDM Pharmaceutical formulation Acta Pharmaceutica Technologica De Boer et al. (1988)
decisions
66 Pharmacy industry MCDM Compressed tablet decisions European Journal of Pharmaceutics and De Boer et al. (1991)
Biopharmaceutics
67 Polymer industry GA Eepoxy-polymerisation process Chemical Engineering Science Deb et al. (2004a)
decisions
68 Polymer industry EA Epoxy polymerisation decisions Lecture Notes in Computer Science Deb et al. (2004b) Table 1
69 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Nuclear waste management International Journal of Production Delhaya et al. (1991)
safety decisions Economics
70 Biotechnology MCDM Chromatographic decisions Journal of Chromatography Deming (1991)
71 Oil and gas industry AHP Cross-country petroleum pipeline IEEE Transactions on Engineering Dey (2004)
decisions Management
72 Oil and gas industry AHP Cross-country petroleum pipeline International Journal of Production Dey (2006)
decisions Economics
73 Oil and gas industry AHP Pipelines route decisions Cost Engineering Dey and Gupta (1999)
74 Oil and gas industry AHP Cross-country petroleum pipeline Pipeline and Gas Industry Journal Dey and Gupta (2000)
decisions
75 Oil and gas industry AHP Cross-country petroleum pipeline Project Management Journal Dey and Gupta (2001)
decisions
76 Oil and gas industry AHP Petroleum pipeline laying International Journal of Project Dey et al. (1994)
decisions Management
77 Oil and gas industry AHP Pipeline profitability decisions International Journal of Project Dey et al. (1996)
Management
78 Oil and gas industry AHP Pipeline maintenance decisions Cost Engineering Dey et al. (1998)
79 Biotechnology GA Batch plant design decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Dietz et al. (2006)
80 Biotechnology MCDM Batch plant design decisions Mathematical and Computer Modeling Dietz et al. (2007)
81 (Others) general MOMP Non inferior solutions Computers and Chemical Engineering Dimkou and Papalexandri
(1998)
82 Cellular industry MCDM Cellular manufacturing decisions Engineering Optimization Dimopoulos (2007)
83 Oil and gas industry MCDM Natural gas energy system Energy Policy Dinca et al. (2007)
decisions
84 Fuel and energy MCDM sustainable technological energy European Journal of Operational Doukas et al. (2007)
priorities decisions Research
85 Pharmacy industry MCDM Strategic planning decisions International Journal of Production Dutta et al. (2007)
Economics
423
424
86 Oil and gas industry MCDM Oil and gas exploration decisions Operations Research Dyer et al. (1990) Table 1
87 Military industry MAUT Weapon-grade plutonium Operations Research Dyer et al. (1998)
decisions
88 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Radiation Protection Dosimetry Ehrhardt (1997)
safety
89 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Radiation Protection Dosimetry Ehrhardt et al. (1993)
safety
M. Pirdashti et al.
90 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Kerntechnik Ehrhardt et al. (1997)
safety
91 Fuel and energy AHP Solar energy technology Energy Policy Elkarmi and Mustafa (1993)
decisions
92 Food industry MCDM Thermal processing optimisation Journal of Food Process Engineering Erdogdu (2003)
decisions
93 Environmental health and AHP Environment impact decisions Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal Eugene and Dey (2005)
safety
94 Pharmacy industry MCDM Clinical trial decisions Biotechnology Progress Farid et al. (2005)
95 Food industry MCDM Food safety management Journal of Food Protection Fazil et al. (2008)
decisions
96 Oil and gas industry MAUT Upstream petroleum financial Energy Policy Ferreira et al. (2004)
decisions
97 Environmental health and MCDM Wastewater treatment decisions Water Research Flores-Alsina et al. (2008)
safety
98 Food industry AHP Product formulation decisions Food Quality and Preference Fogliatto and Albin (2003)
99 (Others) general GA Micro heat exchanger decisions International Journal of Heat and Mass Foli et al. (2006)
Transfer
100 Polymer industry MODM Emulsion polymerisation European Journal of Operational Fonteix et al. (2004)
decisions Research
101 Environmental health and MAUT Nuclear emergency decisions Journal of Multi Criteria Decision French (1996)
safety Analysis
102 Fuel and energy MCDM Biomass-based energy Biomass and Bioenergy Frombo et al. (2009a) Table 1
production decisions
103 Fuel and energy MCDM Biomass-based energy Energy Frombo et al. (2009b)
production decisions
104 Military industry MCDM Real-time event simulations Environmental Modeling and Software Frysinger et al. (2007)
decisions
105 Polymer industry MCDM Radical polymerisation process Macromolecular Theory and Simulations Garg and Gupta (1999)
decisions
106 Polymer industry GA Traveling salesman problems Adaptive and Natural Computing Gaspar-Cunha (2005)
(TSP) decisions Algorithms
107 Polymer industry MCDM Polymer twin-screw extrusion International Polymer Processing Gaspar-Cunha et al. (2002)
decisions
108 Polymer industry MODM Co-rotating twin screw extruder Polymer Engineering and Science Gaspar-Cunha et al. (2005)
processing decisions
109 Polymer industry AHP Coating of PVC parts/life cycle Journal of Industrial Ecology Geldermann and Rentz
assessment decisions (2005)
110 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Life cycle decisions Fuzzy Sets and Systems Geldermann et al. (2000)
safety
111 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Omega Geldermann et al. (2009)
safety
112 Oil and gas industry MCDM Petroleum contaminated site Expert Systems with Applications Geng et al. (2001)
decisions
113 Pharmacy industry MCDM Manufacturing capacity decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering George et al. (2007)
114 Fuel and energy ELECTRE Energy planning decisions European Journal of Operational Georgopoulou et al. (1997)
Research
115 Environmental health and ELECTRE Greenhouse gas control decisions European Journal of Operational Georgopoulou et al. (2003)
safety Research
116 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Spray cooling optimisation Materials and Manufacturing processes Ghosh et al. (2004)
industry decisions
117 (Others) general MCDM Chemical process decisions Reliability Engineering and Systems Goel et al. (2002)
Safety
425
426
118 Fuel and energy PROMETHEE Energy exploitation scheme European Journal of Operational Goumas and Lygerou (2000) Table 1
decisions Research
119 Environmental health and GA Emission control decisions Computers and Operations Research Grandinetti et al. (2007)
safety
120 Polymer industry DE Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) Journal of Bio-Inspired Computation Gujarathi and Babu (2010)
reactor decisions
121 Environmental health and TOPSIS Hazardous materials decisions Expert Systems with Applications Gumus (2009)
safety
M. Pirdashti et al.
122 Cellular industry MCDM Storm sewer decisions Engineering Optimization Guo et al. (2007)
123 Polymer industry GA Industrial Nylon-6 semi-batch Journal of Applied Polymer Science Gupta et al. (1998)
reactor decisions
124 Food industry GA Desalination technology Computers and Chemical Engineering Guria et al. (2005a)
decisions
125 Mineral and metallurgical GA Froth flotation circuit decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Guria et al. (2005b)
industry Research
126 Biotechnology MCDM Chromatographic separation Journal of Separation Science Hadjmohammadi and Safa
decisions (2004)
127 Food industry AHP Sea water desalination decisions Desalination Hajeeh and Al-Othman
(2005)
128 (Others) general MODM Chemical process decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Halsall-Whitney and
Thibault (2006)
129 Environmental health and MCDM Public debate on nuclear power European Journal of Operational Hamalainen (1990)
safety decisions Research
130 Environmental health and MAUT Nuclear emergency decisions Risk Analysis Hamalainen et al. (2000)
safety
131 (Others) general AHP Laboratory reactor selection Computers and Chemical Engineering Hanratty and Joseph (1992)
decisions
132 Environmental health and MCDM Air quality decisions Science of the Total Environment Hardie et al. (1995)
safety
133 Polymer industry PROMETHEE Tablet manufacturing fine Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Hendriks et al. (1992)
granules decisions Systems
134 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Heavy metal pollution decisions Analytical Chemical Acta Herngren et al. (2006) Table 1
safety
135 Environmental health and MCDM Evacuation plan decisions Interfaces Hobeika, et al. (1994)
safety
136 Mineral and metallurgical GA Optimal operating decisions Steel Research International Hodge et al. (2006)
industry
137 (Others) general MODM Chemical process decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Hoffmann et al. (2001)
Research
138 (Others) general MCDM Technology assessment decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Hoffmannet al. (2004)
Research
139 Biotechnology AHP Anaerobic decisions Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety Hongwei et al. (2004)
140 Oil and gas industry MODM Catalytic reforming process Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Hongye et al. (2003)
decisions
141 Environmental health and MCDM Oil venture decisions Interfaces Hosseini (1986)
safety
142 Oil and gas industry GA Naphtha catalytic reforming Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Hou et al. (2007)
decisions
143 Cellular industry MCDM Machine-component grouping Production Planning and Control Hsu and Su (1998)
decisions
144 (Others) general MOMP Batch plant design decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Huang and Wang (2002)
145 Oil and gas industry GA Crude distillation decisions Chemical Engineering Research and Inamdar et al. (2004)
Design
146 Environmental health and MCDM Radioactive waste management Annals of Operations Research Insua et al. (2000)
safety decisions
147 (Others) general MODM Thermal distribution piping Journal of Mechanisms, Transmission, Ito et al. (1983)
decisions and Automation in Design
148 Pharmacy industry MCDM Chemical process decisions Engineering Costs and Production Jäger et al. (1989)
Economics
149 Mineral and metallurgical GA Chemical reaction optimisation Acta Materialia Jia et al. (2004)
industry decisions
427
428
150 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear safeguard decisions Management Science Judd and Weissenberger Table 1
safety (1982)
151 Polymer industry GA Copoly batch reactor decisions Macromolecular Theory and Simulations Kachhap and Guria et al.
(2005)
152 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear power plant decisions Reliability Engineering and Systems Kafka and Polke (1988)
safety Safety
153 Food industry PROMETHEE Agri-food firms financial Journal of Food Engineering Kalogeras et al. (2005)
performance decisions
M. Pirdashti et al.
154 Oil and gas industry MCDM Oil industrial survival decisions European Journal of Operational Kalu (1998)
Research
155 Environmental health and ELECTRE Solid waste management Bioresource Technology Karagiannidis and
safety decisions Perkoulidis (2009)
156 Environmental health and AHP Air quality decisions Environmental Modeling and Software Karatzas et al. (2003)
safety
157 Environmental health and AHP Subjectivity reduction decisions Process Safety and Environmental Kariuki and Löwe (2006)
safety Protection
158 Oil and gas industry GA Industrial fluidised-bed catalytic Computers and Chemical Engineering Kasat and Gupta (2003)
cracking decisions
159 Oil and gas industry MCDM Industrial FCC decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Kasat et al. (2002)
Research
160 Polymer industry MCDM Polymer science and engineering Materials and Manufacturing Processes Kasat et al. (2003)
decisions
161 (Others) general PROMETHEE Chemometrics decisions Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Keller et al. (1991)
Systems
162 Environmental health and MCDM Off-site emergency management Radiation Protection Dosimetry Kelly et al. (1996)
safety decisions
163 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Soil site analysis decisions Analytical Chemical Acta Khalil et al. (2004)
safety
164 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Waste management decisions Journal of Environmental Management Khalil et al. (2005)
safety
165 Oil and gas industry PROMETHEE Oil regeneration technology Journal of Hazardous Materials Kheilifi et al. (2006) Table 1
decisions
166 Environmental health and EA Waste solvent recycling Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Kim and Smith (2004)
167 (Others) general MAUT Dismantling scenario decisions Annals of Nuclear Energy Kim and Song (2009)
168 Fuel and energy AHP Nuclear fuel cycle optimisation Annals of Nuclear Energy Kim et al. (1999)
decisions
169 Polymer industry MCDM Styrene monomer plant Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Kim et al. (2006)
cost-benefit decisions Industries
170 Food industry MOMP Conveyor-belt dryer design Journal of Food Engineering Kiranoudis and Markatos
decisions (2000)
171 (Others) general MODM Cyclic adsorption processes Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Ko and Moon (2002)
analysis decisions Research
172 (Others) general PROMETHEE Multivariate data analysis The Analyst Kokot and Phuong (1999)
decisions
173 (Others) general PROMETHEE Microwave digestion procedure Analytical Chemical Acta Kokot et al. (1992)
selection decisions
174 Environmental health and MCDM Sustainability and plant quality Computers and electronics in agriculture Korner and Van Straten
safety decisions (2008)
175 (Others) general MCDM Reactor demonstration decisions Energy Policy Kreczko et al. (1987)
176 Food industry MCDM Water pipeline network decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Kritpiphat et al. (1998)
Research
177 Food industry MOMP Fluidised dryer design decisions Chemical Engineering Journal Krokida and Kiranoudis,
(2000)
178 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Gas injection decisions Materials and Manufacturing Processes Kumar et al. (2005)
industry
179 Biotechnology PROMETHEE Biomass collection system Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology Kumar et al. (2006)
decisions
180 Oil and gas industry GA Simulated countercurrent moving Chemical Engineering Science Kundu et al. (2009)
bed chromatographic reactor
decisions
429
430
181 Environmental health and MOMP Nuclear fuel cycle optimisation European Journal of Operational Kunsch and Teghem (1987) Table 1
182 Oil and gas industry GA Industrial-scale separation Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Kurup et al. (2006)
decisions Research
183 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear waste management Journal of Operational Research Society Lathrop and Watson et al.
184 Fuel and energy EA Thermal system design decisions Energy Lazzaretto and Toffolo
(2004)
M. Pirdashti et al.
185 Environmental health and AHP Greenhouse gas control decisions Energy Policy Lee et al. (2007)
safety
186 Fuel and energy AHP Hydrogen technology decisions International Journal of Hydrogen Lee et al. (2008a)
Energy
187 Fuel and energy AHP Hydrogen technology decisions Energy Policy Lee et al. (2008b)
188 Fuel and energy AHP Energy technology decisions Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Lee et al. (2009)
Industries
189 Biotechnology GA Industrial penicillin V bioreactor Biotechnology and Bioengineering Lee et al. (2007)
train decisions
190 (Others) general PROMETHEE Partial order analysis decisions Journal of Chemical Information and Lerche et al. (2002)
Computer Science
191 Polymer industry PROMETHEE Treated polyester quality Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Lewi et al. (1992)
decisions Systems
192 Environmental health and TOPSIS Green chemical processing Chemical Engineering Research and Li et al. (2006)
safety decisions Design
193 Environmental health and GA-TOPSIS Chemical process decisions Chemical Engineering Research and Li et al. (2009)
safety Design
194 (Others) general MOMP Process evaluation decisions Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Li and Lou (2008)
195 (Others) general GA Chemical process optimisation Computer Aided Chemical Engineering Li et al. (2003)
decisions
196 Oil and gas industry GA Refinery planning optimisation Computer Aided Chemical Engineering Li et al. (2003)
decisions
197 (Others) general GP-MOMP Environment impact decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Lim et al. (1999) Table 1
Research
198 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Pollutant control decisions Atmospheric Environment Lim et al. (2005)
safety
199 Fuel and energy PROMETHEE Liquefied petroleum decisions Atmospheric Environment Lim et al. (2006)
200 Fuel and energy PROMETHEE Emission control decisions Fuel Lim et al. (2007a)
201 Fuel and energy PROMETHEE Emission control decisions Atmospheric Environment Lim et al. (2007b)
202 Environmental health and MAUT Coal-fired power decisions IEEE Transactions on System Lincoln and Rubin (1979)
safety Management Cybernet
203 Nanotechnology MCDM Nanomedicines knowledge Nonmedical: Nanotechnology, Biology Linkov et al. (2008)
decisions and Medicine
204 Nanotechnology MCDM Non-material assessment Journal of Nanoparticle Research Linkov et al. (2007)
decisions
205 Biotechnology MODM Control of (bio) chemical process Chemical Engineering Science Logist et al. (2009)
decisions
206 Environmental health and MCDM Greenhouse gas control decisions Operations Research Letters Loulou and Kanudia (1999)
safety
207 Environmental health and AHP Paper recycling decisions Journal of Environmental Management Madu et al. (2002)
safety
208 (Others) general MCDM Tray flow decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Mahdipour (2006)
209 Mineral and metallurgical GA Alloy steel design decisions Materials and Manufacturing Processes Mahfouf et al. (2005)
industry
210 Polymer industry DE Epoxy polymerisation decisions Macromolecular Theory and Simulations Majumdar and Mitra (2004a)
211 (Others) general MCDM Reaction network decisions Chemical Engineering Journal Majumdar and Mitra (2004b)
212 Polymer industry MCDM Epoxy polymerisation decisions Polymer Majumdar et al. (2005a)
213 Polymer industry EA Polymerisation process decisions Macromolecular Theory and Simulations Majumdar et al. (2005b)
214 Environmental health and MCDM Solar energy technology Desalination Mamlook and Badran (2007)
safety decisions
215 (Others) general MCDM Breeder reactor program Energy Manne and Richels (1978)
decisions
431
432
216 Cellular industry MCDM Cellular manufacturing decisions Production Planning and Control Mansouri (2003) Table 1
217 Polymer industry GA Homopolymerisation of styrene Journal of Applied Polymer Science Massebeuf et al. (2003)
decisions
218 (Others) general GP Process synthesis optimisation Engineering and Technology Mavrotas and Diakoulaki
decisions (2005)
219 Fuel and energy GP Best available techniques (BATs) Energy Economics Mavrotas et al. (2007)
decisions
220 Environmental health and MOMP- Atmospheric pollution control Environmental Management Mavrotas et al. (2006)
M. Pirdashti et al.
safety PROMETHEE decisions

221 Food industry MCDM Food safety management International Journal of Food McMeekin et al. (2006)
decisions Microbiology
222 Environmental health and MAUT Nuclear waste management Risk Analysis Merkhofer and Keeney
223 Polymer industry MODM Radical polymerisation process Latin American Applied Research Merquior et al. (2001)
decisions
224 Cellular industry MCDM Life cycle decisions Energy Conservation and Management Mistretta et al. (2003)
225 Polymer industry MCDM Industrial grinding optimisation Chemical Engineering Science Mitra and Gopinath (2004)
decisions
226 Polymer industry MCDM Polymerisation reactor decisions Materials and Manufacturing Processes Mitra and Majumdar (2007)
227 Polymer industry GA Industrial semibatch reactor Journal of Applied Polymer Science Mitra et al. (1998)
decisions
228 Polymer industry MCDM Semibatch epoxy polymerisation Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Mitra et al. (2004a)
decisions Research
229 Polymer industry GA Epoxy polymerisation decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Mitra et al. (2004b)
230 Oil and gas industry GA Synthesis gas production Computers and Chemical Engineering Mohanty (2006)
optimisation decisions
231 Food industry AHP Desalination technology Desalination Mohsen and A1-Jayyousi
decisions (1999)
232 Fuel and energy AHP Domestic solar water heating Energy Conservation and Management Mohsen and Akash (1997)
decisions
233 (Others) general GA Purified terephthalic process Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Mu et al. (2003) Table 1
decisions
234 (Others) general MODM Industrial operation efficiency Computers and Chemical Engineering Mu et al. (2004)
decisions
235 Oil and gas industry MCDM Single-cell oil production European Journal of Operational Muniglia et al. (2004)
decisions Research
236 (Others) general GA Reverse osmosis system Separation Science and Technology Murthy and Vengal (2006)
decisions
237 Oil and gas industry MODM Operations planning and Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Nandasana et al. (2003)
optimisation decisions Research
238 Environmental health and GA Removal of Volatile Organics Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Nemmani et al. (2009)
safety from Water decisions Research
239 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Chemometrics decisions Analytical Chemical Acta Ni et al. (2002)
industry
240 Food industry PROMETHEE Food sample calibration Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Ni et al. (2004)
decisions Systems
241 (Others) general PROMETHEE Profile analysis decisions Talanta Ni et al. (2007)
242 Environmental health and ELECTRE Waste management decisions Land Use Policy Norese (2006)
safety
243 Fuel and energy MCDM Fusion energy development Management Science North and Stengel (1982)
decisions
244 Fuel and energy GA Hydrogen technology decisions Journal of Chemical Engineering of Oh et al. (2001)
Japan
245 Biotechnology AHP Bioreactor liver bioreactors Biochemical Engineering Journal Omasa et al. (2004)
decisions
246 Environmental health and AHP Environment impact decisions Journal of Materials Processing Ong et al. ( 2001)
safety Technology
247 (Others) general GA Rocket engine decisions Journal of Propulsion and Power Oyama and Liou (2002)
248 Oil and gas industry MCDM Crude oil allocation decisions Decision Support Systems Paolucci et al. (2002)
249 Fuel and energy ELECTRE Decentralised energy system Omega Papadopoulos and
decisions Karagiannidis (2008)
433
434
250 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Decision Support Systems Papamichail and French Table 1
safety (2005)
251 Environmental health and MCDM Nuclear emergency decisions Nuclear Technology Papazoglo and Chrisou
safety (1997)
252 Oil and gas industry MCDM Location planning decisions Journal of Hazardous Materials Papazoglou et al. (2000)
253 (Others) general AHP Process evaluation decisions International Journal of Production Partovi (2007)
Economics
254 Cellular industry MCDM Paper recycling decisions Omega Pati et al. (2008)
M. Pirdashti et al.
255 Fuel and energy MCDM Synthetic fuel facility decisions Operations Research Peerenboom et al. (1989)
256 Food industry AHP Regional drinking water decisions European Journal of Operational Peniwati and Brenner (2008)
Research
257 Food industry MCDM Control cheese ripening decisions Journal of Food Engineering Perrot et al. (2004)
258 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Radioactive waste management International Transaction in Operational Petras (1997)
259 Mineral and metallurgical GA Industrial iron blast furnace Applied Soft Computing Pettersson et al. (2007)
industry decisions
260 Cellular industry AHP Environment impact decisions Journal of Industrial Ecology Pineda-Henson et al. (2002)
261 Fuel and energy AHP Transportation policy decisions Computers and Industrial Engineering Poh and Ang (1999)
262 Fuel and energy PROMETHEE Cooking-energy decisions Renewable Energy Pohekar and Ramchandran
(2004a)
263 Fuel and energy MCDM Sustainable energy decisions Renewable and Sustainable Energy Pohekar and Ramchandran
Review (2004b)
264 Oil and gas industry PROMETHEE Gas chromatography data Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Purcell et al. (2005)
sampling decisions Systems
265 Food industry PROMETHEE Spectral object decisions Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Purcell et al. (2007)
Systems
266 Fuel and energy GA Solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) Chemical Engineering Journal Quddus et al. (2010)
reactor decisions
267 Polymer industry DE NaOH addition pattern decisions Macromolecular Theory and Simulations Raha et al. (2004)
268 Fuel and energy GA To optimise of steam reformer Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Rajesh et al. (2000) Table 1
performance Research
269 Fuel and energy GA Hydrogen technology decisions Chemical Engineering Science Rajesh et al. (2001)
270 Environmental health and AHP Greenhouse gas control decisions Global Environmental Change Ramanathan (1999)
safety
271 Fuel and energy MODM Cooking-energy decisions Energy Ramanathan and Ganesh
(1994)
272 (Others) general GP Distillation unit decisions Canadian Journal of Chemical Ramzan and Witt (2006)
Engineering
273 Environmental health and AHP Surplus elemental mercury Journal of Environmental Management Randall et al. (2004)
safety decisions
274 (Others) general MCDM Material selection decisions Materials and Design Rao (2008)
275 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Coal selection decisions Fuzzy Sets and Systems Ravi and Reddy (1999)
industry
276 Environmental health and GA Cyclone separator optimisation Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Ravi et al. (2000)
277 Polymer industry GA Venturi scrubbers decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Ravi et al. (2002)
Research
278 Fuel and energy MOMP distributed energy resource (DER) Applied Energy Ren et al. (2010)
systems decisions
279 Cellular industry MCDM High yield pulping process European Journal of Operational Renaud et al. (2007)
decisions Research
280 Environmental health and MCDM Hazardous materials decisions Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Reniers et al. (2006)
safety Industries
281 Environmental health and MCDM Radionuclide contaminated Ecological Modeling Rios-Insua et al. (2006)
safety freshwater decisions
282 Pharmacy industry MCDM Drug discovery decisions Drug Discovery Today Ritchie (2001)
283 Fuel and energy EA Combined cycle power plant International Journal of Thermal Sciences Roosen et al. (2003)
decisions
284 Fuel and energy MCDM Nuclear power plant decisions European Journal of Operational Roy and Bouyssou (1986)
Research
435
436
285 Fuel and energy MCDM Solar energy technology decisions Computers, Environment and Urban Rylatt et al. (2001) Table 1
System
286 Environmental health and MCDM Waste management decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Sadiq et al. (2005)
safety
287 Oil and gas industry SA-GA Industrial fluidised-bed catalytic Computers and Chemical Engineering Sankararao and Gupta
cracking decisions (2007a)
288 Oil and gas industry DE Industrial fluidised-bed catalytic Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Sankararao and Gupta
cracking unit (FCCU) decisions Research (2007b)
M. Pirdashti et al.
289 Biotechnology GA Fed batch bioreactor decisions Chemical Engineering Science Sarkar and Modak (2005)
290 (Others) general GA Seeded batch crystallisation Chemical Engineering Science Sarkar et al. (2006)
process decisions
291 (Others) general GA Reactive crystallisation process AICHE Journal Sarkar et al. (2007)
decisions
292 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Hot metal silicon content Materials and Manufacturing Processes Saxén et al. (2007)
industry decisions
293 Oil and gas industry MCDM Hydrocarbon plant design Computers and Chemical Engineering Schmuhl et al. (1996)
decisions
294 Military industry MCDM Military ordinance decisions European Journal of Operational Schniederjans et al. (2009)
Research
295 Biotechnology MOMP Fermentation process planning Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Sendin et al. (2006)
decisions Research
296 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Water quality decisions Water Air Soil Pollution Settle et al. (2007)
safety
297 Environmental health and MCDM Public health and chemical Toxicology Sexton et al. (1995)
safety mixture decisions
298 (Others) general ELECTRE Material selection decisions Materials and Design Shanian and Savadogo
(2006a)
299 Fuel and energy TOPSIS Metallic bipolar plate decisions Journal of Power Source Shanian and savadogo
(2006b)
300 Fuel and energy ELECTRE Polymer electrolyte membrane Electrochimica Acta Shanian and Savadogo
decisions (2006c)
301 Oil and gas industry MCDM Reactor-regenerator optimisation Petroleum Science and Technology Shelokar et al. (2003) Table 1
decisions
302 (Others) general GA Process evaluation decisions Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Shi and Yao (2001)
303 Polymer industry GA Radical polymerisation process Computers and Chemical Engineering Silva and Biscaia (2003)
decisions
304 Fuel and energy MCDM Pollutant control decisions Journal of the Operational Research Siskos et al. (1986)
Society
305 Pharmacy industry MCDM Domperidone and pantoprazole Journal of Pharmaceutical and Sivakumar et al. (2007)
separation decisions Biomedical Analysis
306 Oil and gas industry MCDM Portfolio management decisions Interface Skaf (1999)
307 Biotechnology MCDM Chromatographic separation Journal of Chromatography Smilde et al. (1986)
decisions
308 Biotechnology MCDM Chromatographic separation Journal of Chromatography Smilde et al. (1987)
decisions
309 Oil and gas industry MCDM Oil and gas investment decisions Operations Research Smith and Mccardle (1999)
310 Cellular industry GA Cellular manufacturing decisions International Journal of Production Solimanpur et al. (2004)
Research
311 Oil and gas industry AHP Environmental quality decisions Environmental Impact Assessment Review Solnes (2003)
312 Oil and gas industry MOMP Environment impact decisions Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Song et al. (2002)
Research
313 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Recycling decisions Journal of Cleaner Production Spengler et al. (1998)
safety
314 Cellular industry MCDM Cellular manufacturing decisions Production Planning and Control Sridhar and Rajendran (1996)
315 (Others) general MCDM Thermodynamic data and phase Computer Coupling of Phase Diagrams Stan and Reardon (2003)
decisions and Thermochemistry
316 Food industry MCDM Chemical recycling decisions Process Safety and Environmental Sugiyama et al. (2006)
Protection
317 Oil and gas industry MODM Condensate treatment decisions Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Sun and Lou (2008)
318 (Others) general MODM Separation-recycle system Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering Sun et al. (2004)
decisions
437
438
319 Mineral and metallurgical MCDM Continuous-casting production Omega Tang and Wang (2008) Table 1
industry decisions
320 Polymer industry GA Industrial ethylene reactor Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Tarafder et al. (2005a)
decisions Research
321 Polymer industry GA Industrial styrene monomer Chemical Engineering Science Tarafder et al. (2005b)
manufacturing decisions
322 (Others) general MODM Chemical process decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Tarafder et al. (2007)
323 Fuel and energy GA Gas-generator engine decisions Acta Astronautic Tong et al. (2006)
M. Pirdashti et al.
324 Environmental health and TOPSIS Fuel mode evaluation decisions Energy Policy Tzeng et al. (2005)
safety
325 Environmental health and MADM Environmental quality decisions Journal of Environmental Management Tzeng et al. (2002)
safety
326 Environmental health and PROMETHEE Greenhouse gas control European Journal of Operational Vaillancourt and Waaub
safety decisions Research (2004)
327 Pharmacy industry AHP Chemotherapy compounding Expert Systems with Applications Vidal et al. (2009)
decisions
328 Biotechnology MODM Anaerobic digesters decisions Journal of Chemical Technology and Videla et al. (1990)
Biotechnology
329 (Others) general MCDM Electrochemical reactor Chemical and Biochemical Engineering Vijayasekaran et al. (2004)
decisions Quarterly
330 Oil and gas industry MCDM Offshore oil discharge decisions Operations Research Von Winterfeldt (1982)
331 Military industry MCDM Nuclear weapons stockpile Interfaces Von Winterfeldt and
decisions Schweitzer (1998)
332 Oil and gas industry MCDM Exploration decisions Interface Walls et al. (1995)
333 Food industry MCDM Microbial food safety and food International Journal of Food Wijtzes et al. (1998)
quality decisions Microbiology
334 Environmental health and AHP Hydrogen technology decisions Technological Forecasting and Social Winebrake and Creswick
safety Change (2003)
335 (Others) general PROMETHEE Heat exchanger network European Journal of Operational Wolters and Mareschal
decisions Research (1995)
Table 1
336 Environmental health and MCDM Carbon dioxide processing Expert Systems with Applications Wu and Chan (2009)
safety decisions
337 (Others) general MCDM Chemical process decisions Interface Yang and Mou (1993)
338 Polymer industry GA Industrial styrene reactor Computers and Chemical Engineering Yee et al. (2003)
decisions
339 Environmental health and AHP Environment impact decisions Chinese Journal of Chemical Yu et al. (2007)
safety Engineering
340 Food industry MCDM Beer membrane separation Journal of Membrane Science Yuen et al. (2000)
decisions
341 Environmental health and MCDM Radioactively contaminated site Journal of Environmental Radioactivity Zeevaert et al. (2001)
safety decisions
342 Environmental health and AHP Wastewater treatment decisions Journal of Environmental Management Zeng et al. (2007)
safety
343 (Others) general GA Chromatographic reactor Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Zhang et al. (2001)
decisions Research
344 Biotechnology GA Chromatographic reactor Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Zhang et al. (2002a)
decisions Research
345 Polymer industry GA Chiral separation decisions AIChE Journal Zhang et al. (2002b)
346 Biotechnology MCDM Moving bed and varicol process Journal of Chromatography Zhang et al. (2003)
decisions
347 Biotechnology GA Design and operation planning Biochemical Engineering Journal Zhang et al. (2004)
decisions
348 Food industry MCDM Quality performance decisions Talanta Zhang et al. (2006)
349 Oil and gas industry AHP Scheduling decisions Computers and Chemical Engineering Zhou et al. (2000a)
350 Polymer industry GA Poly (methyl methacrylate) Journal of Applied Polymer Science Zhou et al. (2000b)
decisions
351 Fuel and energy MCDM Energy system decisions Journal of Thermal Science Zhu et al. (1992)
439
We found that industries like biotechnology, polymer, and mineral and metallurgical
were mainly concerned with optimisation while environmental health and safety industry
were mainly concerned with ranking of the alternatives. The evaluated criteria were
economic, efficiency, and environmental friendliness with only very few papers included
safety and health. We also noticed that environmental friendliness was the essential
criteria used in the alternative ranking methods. Some industries (e.g., fuel and energy,
oil and gas) focused on both assessing and ranking of the alternatives and optimisation.
Figure 2 A classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the utilised

methodology (see online version for colours)
Figure 3 A classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the application area
(see online version for colours)
In addition to ranking and optimisation, environmental impact assessment was considered

commonly in the cellular industry and nanotechnology. In food industry, economic
consideration is almost a must in the assessment besides efficiency. Finally, the pattern
was quite contradictory in military industry area, in which just about all criteria were
considered with the exception of efficiency.
Furthermore, we studied the preferred metrics for the abovementioned criteria (i.e.,
economic, efficiency, safety, health, and environmental friendliness). Economic was
mostly measured quantitatively in local currency, involving different types of costs
related to the process lifecycle. Other metrics such as profit, price of the products, and
economic damage were also mentioned in the literature. The most preferable metrics,
however, were the capital cost, cost of investment, cost of production, cost of operation,
and cost of maintenance.
Efficiency was a criterion that widely assessed in papers optimising process design or
operation. This criterion was commonly measured quantitatively with highly diversified
metrics since it was generally dependent on the type of process. The metrics to quantify
efficiency could be generally classified into material properties, operational conditions,
process parameters, and system characteristics. The normal practice was to maximise the
good essence of the process and to minimise the undesirables. The most preferred metrics
for this criterion were product yield, productivity, conversion, reaction time, and
concentration of undesired by products.
We noticed that safety criteria were not included in the MCDM models reviewed in
this study. In fact, the borderline between safety and health was ill-defined; some papers
categorised workers exposure metric under safety instead of health – which was a more
relevant criterion especially when the study involved long-term occupational exposures.
Safety was assessed qualitatively or quantitatively, and the most preferable metric to
quantify this criterion was risk (e.g., accidental risk and death risk).
Likewise safety, health was also another criterion which was rarely included in the
MCDM models. In practice, this criterion was measured quantitatively, but qualitative
measure was also sometimes used to evaluate health impacts such as stress level. The
most preferred metric to quantify health criterion was carcinogenic risk besides toxicity
risk.
Environmental friendliness was among the criteria that were most commonly
included in the MCDM models. This criterion was relatively easier to quantify compared
to safety and health criteria. Different metrics were used to quantify environmental
friendliness, with so many different approaches including the waste reduction algorithm
and the lifecycle analysis. Among the most preferable metrics were carbon dioxide or
other greenhouse gaseous emissions and resources (raw material or energy)
consumptions.
Finally, Figure 4 presents a classification of the published MCDM-CE papers
according to the year of publication. As shown in this figure, the application of MCDM
in CE has enjoyed a great deal of popularity since 1998. Nevertheless, this number has
dropped slightly over the past two years.
Figure 4 A classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the year of publication
(see online version for colours)
Figure 5 shows the top 15 journals publishing MCDM-CE papers in the past three
decades. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research Journal with 26 papers has
published the highest number of papers in MCDM over the past three decades.
Computers and Chemical Engineering and European Journal of Operational Research,
follows with 25 and 17 MCDM papers related to CE, respectively. Chemical Engineering
Science, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, and Energy Policy are the next three
journals on the list with 11, 8, and 8 papers, respectively.
We also studied the financial support provided to the 351 papers cited in this
research. A large number (114 papers or 32.5%) of them received financial support for
their research from a variety of sources including National Science Foundation,
Commission of the European Communities, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council, Environmental Protection Agency, National Natural Science Foundation of
China, Department of Science and Technology Government of India, National Science
Council of Taiwan, and various ministries of Science and Technology, among others. The
remaining 237 papers (67.5%) either did not receive financial support or did not clearly
specify their funding source.
Figure 5 The top 15 journals publishing MCDM-CE papers in the past three decades (see online
version for colours)
4 Conclusions and future research directions
Our review of 351 papers suggests that a variety of MCDM tools and techniques has been
used successfully on several applications in CE. Since CE problems often involve
multiple conflicting criteria with disparate measurement scales, MCDM methods have
great potential in CE applications. In this study, we briefly described and classified the
MCDM approaches that have been used so far in the literature. All presented MCDM
methods are powerful, but with some strengths and weaknesses. As Figure 4 shows, a
majority (293 papers of 83.5%) have been published after 1997, thus, the popularity of
MCDM in CE is growing and deserves further attention of researchers. We also
discovered that environmental criteria has been evaluated in MCDM since decades ago
and is being consistently included ever since until now. Safety and health criteria were
already assessed back in the 90s, but the trend shows some declination in the early 21st
century. Nevertheless, these two criteria are gradually getting back on track in the last
couple of years.
This study suggests future work in several directions as follows:
1 formal adoption of MCDM education in CE curricula

2 classification of criteria and/or features that characterise fruitful application of
MCDM methods versus other DM methods
3 identification of common CE case studies that may clearly reflect the distinguishing
features of MCDM methods, thus providing guidance for practitioners
4 classification of types of applications and identification of other CE applications
where MCDM can play a significant role
5 detailed study of CE applications to demonstrate funding patterns and practical
usefulness that drive research on MCDM
6 analysis of MCDM methods and applications in CE versus other application fields.
This paper serves as a reference for chemical engineers and it highlights the potential
applications of MCDM in CE problems. We hope that the concepts introduced here will
provide inspiration for future research.
References
Abouelnaga, A.E., Metwally, A., Nagy, M.E. and Agamy, S. (2009) ‘Optimum selection of an
energy resource using fuzzy logic’, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 239, No. 12,
pp.3062–3068.
Abraham, A., Jain, L. and Goldberg, R. (2005) Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization:
Theoretical Advances and Applications, Springer, Berlin.
Achillas, C., Vlachokostas, C., Moussiopoulos, N. and Banias, G. (2010) ‘Decision support system
for the optimal location of electrical and electronic waste treatment plants: a case study in
Greece’, Waste Management, Vol. 30, pp.870–879.
Agrawal, V.P., Kohli, V. and Gupta, S. (1991) ‘Computer aided robot selection: the multiple
attribute decision making approach’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 29,
No. 8, pp.1629–1644.
Ahn, C.W. (2006) Advances in Evolutionary Algorithms: Theory, Design and Practice, Springer,
Berlin.
Al-Shemmeri, T., Al-Kloub, B. and Pearman, A. (1997) ‘Model choice in multi-criteria decision
aid’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 97, pp.550–560.
Al-Subhi Al-Harbi, K.M. (2001) ‘Application of the AHP in project management’, International
Journal of Project Management, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp.19–27.
Anand, R.P. (1995) ‘Multi-criteria methods in river basin planning: a case study’, Water Science
and Technology, Vol. 31, pp.261–272.
Ananda, J. and Herath, G. (2005) ‘Evaluating public risk preferences in forest land-use choices
using multi-attribute utility theory’, Ecological Economics, Vol. 55, pp.408–419.
Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R.B., Albadvi, A. and Aghdasi, M. (2010) ‘PROMETHEE: a
comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications’, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 200, pp.198–215.
Bertsimas, D. and Tsitsiklis, J. (1993) ‘Simulated annealing’, Statistical Science, Vol. 8, No. 1,
pp.10–15.
Brans, J.P. (1982) ‘Lingenierie de la decision. Elaboration dinstruments daide a la decision.
Methode PROMETHEE’, in R. Nadeau and M. Landry (Eds.): Laide A La Decision: Nature,
Instrument Set Perspectives Davenir, pp.183–214, Presses de Universite Laval, Quebec,
Canada.
Brans, J.P. and Mareschal, B. (2005) ‘PROMETHEE methods’, in J. Figueira, S. Greco and
M. Ehrgott (Eds.): Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of The Art Surveys, pp.163–196,
Springer Science Business Media, Inc.
Brans, J.P. and Vincke, P. (1985) ‘A preference ranking organization method. The PROMETHEE
method for MCDM’, Management Science, Vol. 31, pp.641–656.
Brito, A.J. and deAlmeida, A.T. (2009) ‘Multi-attribute risk assessment for risk ranking of natural
gas pipelines’, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 94, pp.187–198.
Cerny, V. (1985) ‘A thermodynamical approach to the travelling salesman problem: an efficient
simulation algorithm’, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Vol. 45, pp.1–51.
Chankong, V. and Haimes, Y.Y. (1983) Multiobjective Decision Making, Theory and Methodology,
Elsevier, New York.
Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W. (1961) Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear
Programming, Wiley and Sons, New York.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. and Ferguson, R.O. (1955) ‘Optimal estimation of executive
compensation by linear programming’, Management Science, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp.138–151.
Chinchuluun, A. and Pardalos, P.M. (2007) ‘A survey of recent developments in multiobjective
optimization’, Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 154, pp.29–50.
Coello, C.A., Lamont, G.B. and Van Veldhuizen, D.A. (2007) Evolutionary Algorithms for Solving
Multi-objective Problems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York.
Collins, T.R., Rossetti, M.D., Nachtmann, H.L. and Oldham, J.R. (2006) ‘The use of multi-attribute
utility theory to determine the overall best-in-class performer in a benchmarking study’,
Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp.431–446.
Cziner, K., Tuomaala, M. and Hurme, M. (2005) ‘Multicriteria decision making in process
integration’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13, pp.475–483.
Deb, K. (2001) Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms, Wiley, Chischester.
Doumpos, M. and Zopounidis, C. (2002) Multicriteria Decision Aid Classification Methods,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
Dyer, J.S. (1990a) ‘Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’, Management Science, Vol. 36,
No. 3, pp.249–258.
Dyer, J.S. (1990b) ‘A clarification of ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’, Management
Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.274–275.
Dyer, R.F. and Forman, E.H. (1992) ‘Group decision support with the analytic hierarchy process’,
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp.99–124.
Ehrgott, M. (2005) Multicriteria Optimization, 2nd ed., Springer, New York.
Ehrgott, M. and Wiecek, M.M. (2005) ‘Multiobjective programming’, in J. Figueira, S. Greco and
M. Ehrgott (Eds.): Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of The Art Surveys, Springer
Science + Business Media Inc., pp.667–722.
Favre, E., Falk, V., Roizard, Ch. and Schaer, E. (2008) ‘Trends in chemical engineering education:
process, product and sustainable chemical engineering challenges’, Education for Chemical
Engineers, Vol. 3, pp.e22–e27.
Favre, E., Marchal-Heusler, L. and Kind, M. (2002) ‘Chemical product engineering: research and
educational challenges’, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, Vol. 80, pp.65–74.
Feng, C-M. and Wang, R-T. (2001) ‘Considering the financial ratios on the performance evaluation
of highway bus industry’, Transport Reviews, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp.449–467.
Giannoulis, C. and Ishizaka, A. (2009) ‘A web-based decision support system with ELECTRE III
for a personalised ranking of British universities’, Decision Support Systems, Article in press,
doi:10.1016/j.dss.2009.06.008.
Gilliams, S., Raymaekers, D., Muys, B. and Orshoven, J.V. (2005) ‘Comparing multiple criteria
decision methods to extend a geographical information system on afforestation’, Computers
and Electronics in Agriculture, Vol. 49, pp.142–158.
Glover, F. (1989) ‘Tabu search – part I’, ORSA Journal on Computing, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp.190–206.
Glover, F. and Laguna, M. (1997) Tabu Search, Kluwer, Norwell, MA.
Goldberg, D.E. (1989) Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning,
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Goletsis, Y., Psarras, J. and Samouilidis, J.E. (2003) ‘Project ranking in the Armenian energy sector
using a multicriteria method for groups’, Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 120,
pp.135–157.
Harker, P.T. and Vargas, L.G. (1990) ‘Reply to ‘remarks on the analytic hierarchy process’, in
J.S. Dyer (Ed.): Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.269–273.
Haupt, R.L. and Haupt, S.E. (2004) Practical Genetic Algorithms, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons,
Hoboken, NJ.
Hermans, C.M., Erickson, J.D., Noordewier, T., Sheldon, A. and Kline, M. (2007) ‘Collaborative
environmental planning in river management: An application of multicriteria decision analysis
in the White River Watershed in Vermont’, Journal of Environment Management, Vol. 84,
pp.534–546.
Hobbs, B.F. and Meier P. (2000) ‘Energy decisions and the environment: a guide to the use of
multicriteria methods’, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
Hokkanen, J. and Salminen, P. (1997) ‘Choosing a solid waste management system using
multicriteria decision analysis’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 98,
pp.19–36.
Holland, J.H. (1975) Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, University of Michigan Press,
Ann Arbor.
Hwang, C.L. and Masud, A.S. (1979) Multi Objective Decision Making, Methods and Applications,
Berlin, Springer.
Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K. (1981) Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications,
Springer-Verlag, New York.
Hwang, W.T. (2004) ‘Application of multi-attribute utility analysis for the decision support of
countermeasures in early phase of a nuclear emergency’, Journal of Korean Association
Radiation Protection, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.65–71.
Janic, M. and Reggiani, A. (2002) ‘An application of the multiple criteria decision making
(MCDM) analysis to the selection of a new hub airport’, European Journal of Transport and
Infrastructure Research, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.113–141.
Kahraman, C. and Kaya, I. (2008) ‘Fuzzy multiple objective linear programming’, in C. Kahraman,
(Ed.): Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making: Theory and Applications with Recent
Developments, Springer Science + Business Media, LLC, pp.325–338.
Kahraman, C., Engin, O., Kabak, O. and Kaya, I. (2009) ‘Information systems outsourcing
decisions using a group decision-making approach’, Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence, Vol. 22, pp.832–841.
Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. (1993) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preference and Value
Tradeoffs, Wiley, New York.
Kim, S.K. and Song, O. (2009) ‘A MAUT approach for selecting a dismantling scenario for the
thermal column in KRR-1’, Annals of Nuclear Energy, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.145–150.
Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C.D. and Vecchi, M.P. (1983) ‘Optimization by simulated annealing’,
Science, New Series, Vol. 220, No. 4598, pp.671–680.
Lai, Y-J., Liu T-Y. and Hwang, C.L. (1994) ‘TOPSIS for MODM’, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 76, No. 3, pp.486–500.
Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K. and Verbeke, A. (2004) ‘PROMETHEE and AHP: the
design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis. Strengthening PROMETHEE with
ideas of AHP’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153, pp.307–317.
Madlener, R., Kowalski, K. and Stagl, S. (2007) ‘New ways for the integrated appraisal of national
energy scenarios: the case of renewable energy use in Austria’, Energy Policy, Vol. 35,
pp.6060–6074.
Martin, J.M., Fajardo, W., Blanco, A. and Requena, I. (2003) ‘Constructing linguistic versions for
the multicriteria decision support systems preference ranking organization method
for enrichment evaluation I and II’, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, Vol. 18,
pp.711–731.
Oduguwa, V., Tiwari, A. and Roy, R. (2005) ‘Evolutionary computing in manufacturing industry:
an overview of recent applications’, Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 5, pp.281–299.
Olson, D.L. (2004) ‘Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models’, Mathematical and Computer
Modelling, Vol. 40, Nos. 7–8, pp.721–727.
Parkan, C. and Wu, M-L. (1999) ‘Decision-making and performance measurement models with
applications to robot selection’, Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 36, pp.503–523.
Paxkan, C. and Wu, M.L. (1997) ‘On the equivalence of operational performance measurement and
multiple attribute decision making’, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 35,
No. 11, pp.2963–2988.
Pudenz, S., Bruggemann, R., Voigt, K. and Welzl, G. (2002) ‘Multi-criteria evaluation and
decision-support instruments for the long-term development of management strategies’,
Umweltwissenschaften und Schadstoff-Forschung, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.52–57.
Queiruga, D., Walther, G., Gonzalez-Benito, J. and Spengler, T. (2008) ‘Evaluation of sites for the
location of WEEE recycling plants in Spain’, Waste Management, Vol. 28, No 1, pp.181–190.
Rogers, M. and Bruen, M. (1998) ‘A new system for weighting environmental ELECTRE III
criteria for use within’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 107, pp.552–563.
Roy, B. (1973) ‘How outranking relation helps multiple criteria decision making’, in J. Cochrane
and M. Zeleny (Eds.): Topics in Multiple Criteria Decision Making, pp.179–201, University
of South Carolina Press.
Roy, B. (1990) ‘Decision-aid and decision making’, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 45, pp.324–331.
Saaty, T.L. (1990) ‘An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper ‘remarks on the analytic
hierarchy process’, in J.S. Dyer (Ed.): Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.259–268.
Saaty, T.L. (1994) ‘Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic
hierarchy process’, European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 74, pp.426–447.
Saaty, T.L. (2000) Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the AHP, 2nd ed.,
Pittsburgh, RWS Publications.
Salminen, P., Hokkanen, J. and Lahdelma, R. (1998) ‘Comparing multicriteria methods in the
context of environmental problems’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 104,
pp.485–496.
Schniederjans, M.J. (1995) Goal Programming: Methodology and Applications, Kluwer, Norwell.
Shanian, A. and Savadogo, O. (2006) ‘A material selection model based on the concept of multiple
attribute decision making’, Materials and Design, Vol. 27, pp.329–337.
Shen, X., Guo, Y., Chen, Q. and Hu, W. (2010) ‘A multi-objective optimization evolutionary
algorithm incorporating preference information based on fuzzy logic’, Computational
Optimization and Applications, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp.159–188.
Shim, J.P. (1989) ‘Bibliographical research on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP)’,
Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 23, pp.161–167.
Shyura, H-J. and Shih, H-S. (2006) ‘A hybrid MCDM model for strategic vendor selection’,
Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 44, pp.749–761.
Steuer, E.R. and Na, P. (2003) ‘Multiple criteria decision making combined with finance: a
categorized bibliographic study’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 150,
pp.496–515.
Storn, R. and Price, K. (1997) ‘Differential evolution – a simple and efficient heuristic for global
optimization over continuous spaces’, Journal of Global Optimization, Vol. 11, pp.341–359.
Triantaphyllou, E. (2000) Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Boston.
Triantaphyllou, E. and Lin, C.T. (1996) ‘Development and evaluation of five fuzzy multiattribute
decision making methods’, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, Vol. 14,
pp.281–310.
Tuomaala, E., Raak, S., Kaukonen, E., Laaksonen, J., Nieminen, M. and Berg, P. (2001) ‘Research
and technology programme activities in Finland’, Technology Review, Vol. 106, Tekes.
Villermaux, J. (1993) ‘Future challenges for basic research in chemical engineering’, Chemical
Engineering Science, Vol. 48, pp.2525–2535.
Vincke, P. (1992) Multicriteria Decision Aid, Wiley, New York.
Wang, X. and Triantaphyllou, E. (2008) ‘Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by
using some ELECTRE methods’, Omega, Vol. 36, pp.45–63.
Weiss, E.N. and Rao, V.R. (1987) ‘AHP design issues for large-scale systems’, Decision Sciences,
Vol. 18, pp.43–61.
Xue, F., Sanderson, A.C. and Graves, R.J. (2003) ‘Pareto-based multi-objective differential
evolution’, in Proceedings of the 2003 Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC‘2003),
Vol. 2, Canberra, Australia, IEEE Press, pp.862–869.
Yoon, K.P. and Hwang, C.L. (1995) Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Sage Publication,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zahedi, F. (1986) ‘The analytical hierarchy process: a survey of the method and its applications’,
Interfaces, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp.96–108.
Zanakis, S.H. and Gupta, S.K. (1985) ‘A categorical bibliographic survey of goal programming’,
Omega, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp.211–222.
Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N. and Dublish, S. (1998) ‘Multi-attribute decision making: a
simulation comparison of select methods’, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 107, pp.507–529.
Zhang, J.L.G., Ruan, D. and Wu, F. (2007) Multi-Objective Group Decision Making Methods,
Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques, Imperial College Press.
Zitzler, E. and Thiele, L. (1999) ‘Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study
and the strength Pareto approach’, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 3,
No. 4, pp.257–271.
Bibliography
Abakarov, A., Sushkov, Y., Almonacid, S. and Simpson, R. (2009) ‘Multiobjective optimization
approach: thermal food processing’, Journal of Food Science, Vol. 74, No. 9, pp.E471–E487.
Abouelnaga, A.E., Metwally, A., Nagy, M.E. and Agamy, S. (2009) ‘Optimum selection of an
energy resource using fuzzy logic’, Nuclear Engineering and Design, Vol. 239, No. 12,
pp.3062–3068.
Agrawal, N., Rangaiah, G.P., Ray, A.K. and Gupta, S.K. (2006) ‘Multi-objective optimization of
the operation of an industrial low-density polyethylene tubular reactor using genetic algorithm
and its jumping gene adaptations’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 45,
pp.3182–3199.
Aguilar-Lasserre, A.A., Bautista, M.A., Ponsich, A. and Gonzalez Huerta, M.A. (2009) ‘An
AHP-based decision-making tool for the solution of multiproduct batch plant design problem
under imprecise demand Aguilar’, Computers and Operations Research, Vol. 36, No. 3,
pp.711–736.
Al-Gharib, S.A., Elkamel, A. and Baker, C.G.J. (2007) ‘A multi-criteria decision approach for
choosing and ranking SO2 emission reduction measures for a network of power stations’,
World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, Vol. 4, Nos. 2–3,
pp.196–225.
Almasri, M.N. and Kaluarachchi, J.J. (2005) ‘Multi-criteria decision analysis for the optimal
management of nitrate contamination of aquifers’, Journal of Environmental Management,
Vol. 74, No. 4, pp.365–381.
Al-Sharrah, G.K., Hankinson, G. and Elkamel, A. (2006) ‘Decision-making for petrochemical
planning using multiobjective and strategic tools’, Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, Vol. 84, No. 11, pp.1019–1030.
Anderson, S.R., Kadirkamanathan, V., Chipperfield, A., Sharifi, V. and Swithenbank, J. (2005)
‘Multi-objective optimization of operational variables in a waste incineration plant’,
Computers & Chemical Engineering, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp.1121–1130.
Aragones-Beltran, P., Mendoza-Roca, J.A., Bes-Pia, A., Garcia-Melon, M. and Parra-Ruiz, E.
(2009) ‘Application of multicriteria decision analysis to jar-test results for chemicals selection
in the physical-chemical’, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 164, No. 1, pp.288–295.
Arbiza, M.J., Bonfill, A., Guillen, G., Mele, F.D., Espuna, A. and Puigjaner, L. (2008)
‘Metaheuristic multiobjective optimisation approach for the scheduling of multiproduct batch
chemical plants’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.233–244.
Arslan, O. (2009) ‘Quantitative evaluation of precautions on chemical tanker operations’, Process
Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp.113–120.
Atashkari, K., Nariman-Zadeh, N., Pilechi, A., Jamali, A. and Yao, X. (2005) ‘Thermodynamic
Pareto optimization of turbojet engines using multi-objective genetic algorithms’,
International Journal of Thermal Sciences, Vol. 44, No. 11, pp.1061–1071.
Athanasopoulos, G., Riba, C.R. and Athanasopoulou, C. (2009) ‘A decision support system for
coating selection based on fuzzy logic and multi-criteria decision making’, Expert Systems
with Applications, Vol. 36, pp.10848–10853.
Atherton, E. and French, S. (1998) ‘Valuing the future: a MADA example involving nuclear waste
storage’, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Vol. 7, pp.304–321.
Aven, T., Vinnem, J.E. and Wiencke, H.S. (2007) ‘A decision framework for risk management,
with application to the offshore oil and gas industry’, Reliability Engineering and System
Safety, Vol. 92, No. 4, pp.433–448.
Ayoko, G.A., Bonire, J.J., Abdulkadir, S.S., Olurinola, P.F., Ehinmidu, J.O., Kokot, S. and Yiasel,
S. (2003) ‘A multicriteria ranking of organotin (IV) compounds with fungicidal properties’,
Applied Organometallic Chemistry, Vol. 17, pp.749–758.
Ayoko, G.A., Morawska, L., Kokot, S. and Gilbert, D. (2004) ‘Application of multicriteria decision
making methods to air quality in the microenvironments of residential houses in Brisbane,
Australia’, Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 38, No. 9, pp.2609–2616.
Ayoko, G.A., Singh, K., Balerea, S. and Kokot, S. (2007) ‘Exploratory multivariate modeling and
prediction of the physico-chemical properties of surface water and groundwater’, Journal of
Hydrology, Vol. 336, pp.115–124.
Babu, B.V., Chakole, P.G. and Mubeen, J.H.S. (2005) ‘Multiobjective differential evolution
(MODE) for optimization of adiabatic styrene reactor’, Chemical Engineering Science,
Vol. 60, pp.4822–4837.
Babu, B.V., Mubeen, J.H.S. and Chakole, P.G. (2007) ‘Simulation and optimization of wiped-film
poly-ethylene terephthalate (PET) reactor using multiobjective differential evolution
(MODE)’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp.541–552.
Barda, O.H. (1990) ‘Multicriteria location of thermal power plants’, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 45, Nos. 2–3, pp.332–346.
Basson, L. and Petrie, J. (2007) ‘A critical systems approach to decision support for process
engineering’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp.876–888.
Baykasoglu, A. and Gindy, N.N.Z. (2000) ‘Multiple objective capability based approach to form
part machine groups for cellular manufacturing applications’, International Journal of Product
Research, Vol. 38, No. 5, pp.1133–1161.
Beccali, M., Cellura, M. and Mistretta, M. (2003) ‘Decision-making in energy planning.
Application of the Electre method at regional level for the diffusion of renewable energy
technology’, Renewable Energy, Vol. 28, pp.2063–2087.
Beck, J., Kempener, R., Cohen, B. and Petrie, J. (2008) ‘A complex systems approach
to planning, optimization and decision making for energy networks’, Energy Policy, Vol. 36,
No 8, pp.2795–2805.
Bertolini, M. and Bevilacqua, M. (2006) ‘A combined goal programming-AHP approach
to maintenance selection problem’, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Vol. 91,
pp.839–848.
Bertsch, V., Treitz, M., Geldermann, J. and Rentz, O. (2007) ‘Sensitivity analyses in multi-attribute
decision support for off-site nuclear emergency and recovery management’, International
Journal of Energy Sector Management, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.342–365.
Bevilacqua, M., D’Amore, A. and Polonara, F. (2004) ‘A multi-criteria decision approach to
choosing the optimal blanching – freezing system’, Journal of Food Engineering, Vol. 63,
pp.253–263.
Beynon, M.J. and Wells, P. (2008) ‘The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor
vehicles based on preference ranking: a PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis’, Omega, Vol. 36,
pp.384–394.
Bhaskar, V., Gupta, S.K. and Ray, A.K. (2000) ‘Applications of multiobjective optimization in
chemical engineering’, Reviews in Chemical Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.1–54.
Bhaskar, V., Gupta, S.K. and Ray, A.K. (2001) ‘Multiobjective optimization of an industrial wiped
film poly (ethylene terephthalate) reactor: some further insights’, Computers & Chemical
Engineering, Vol. 25, Nos. 2–3, pp.391–407.
Bhutani, N., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2006a) ‘First principles, data based and hybrid
modeling and optimization of an industrial hydrocracking unit’, Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, Vol. 45, pp.7807–7816.
Bhutani, N., Ray, A.K. and Rangaia, G.P. (2006b) ‘Modeling, simulation and multi-objective
optimization of an industrial hydrocracking unit’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research, Vol. 45, pp.1354–1372.
Biswas, P., Bose, P. and Tare, V. (2007) ‘Optimal choice of wastewater treatment train by
multi-objective optimization’, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp.125–145.
Bollinger, D. and Pictet, J. (2008) ‘Multiple criteria decision analysis of treatment and land-filling
technologies for waste incineration residues’, Omega, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp.418–428.
Booty, W.G., Resler, O. and McCrimmon, C. (2005) ‘Mass balance modeling of priority toxic
chemicals within the great lakes toxic chemical decision support system: RateCon model
results for Lake Ontario and Lake Erie’, Environmental Modelling & Software, Vol. 20,
pp.671–688.
Braglia, M., Gabbrielli, R. and Miconi, D. (2001) ‘Material handling device selection in cellular
manufacturing’, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Vol. 10, pp.303–315.
Bruggemann, R., Voigt, K., Restrepo, G. and Simon, U. (2008) ‘The concept of stability fields and
hot spots in ranking of environmental chemicals’, Environmental Modelling and Software,
Vol. 23, No. 8, pp.1000–1012.
Cameron, I.T. (2000) ‘An interactive web-based decision support system for hazardous industry
land-use planning’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp.1057–1062.
Carmody, O., Frost, R.L., Kristóf, J., Kokot, S., Kloprogge, J.T. and Mako, E. (2006) ‘Modification
of kaolinite surfaces through mechanochemical activation with quartz: a diffuse reflectance
infrared Fourier transform and chemometrics study’, Applied Spectroscopy,
Vol. 60, No. 12, pp.1414–1422.
Carmody, O., Kristóf, J., Frost, R.L., Makó, E., Kloprogge, J.T. and Kokot, S. (2005) ‘A
spectroscopic study of mechanochemically activated kaolinite with the aid of chemometrics’,
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, Vol. 287, pp.43–56.
Carmody, O., Frost, R., Xi, Y. and Kokot, S. (2007) ‘Adsorption of hydrocarbons on
organo-clays-implications for oil spill remediation’, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science,
Vol. 305, No. 1, pp.17–24.
Cavin, L., Fischer, U., Glover, F. and Hungerbühler, K. (2004) ‘Multi-objective process design in
multi-purpose batch plants using a tabu search optimization algorithm’, Computers and
Chemical Engineering, Vol. 28, pp.459–478.
Cela, R., Martinez, J.A., Gonzalez-Barreiro, C. and Lores, M. (2003) ‘Multi-objective optimisation
using evolutionary algorithms: its application to HPLC separations’, Chemometrics and
Intelligent Laboratory Systems, Vol. 69, Nos. 1–2, pp.137–156.
Chabchoub, H. and Martel, J.M. (2004) ‘A mathematical programming procedure for the choice
problematic’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153, pp.297–306.
Chan, C.W. (2005) ‘An expert decision support system for monitoring and diagnosis of petroleum
production and separation processes’, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 29, No. 1,
pp.131–143.
Chang, P-L. and Chen, Y-C. (1994) ‘A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making method for technology
transfer strategy selection in biotechnology’, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 63, No. 2,
pp.131–139.
Chang, H. and Hou, WC. (2006) ‘Optimization of membrane gas separation systems using genetic
algorithm’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 61, No. 16, pp.5355–5368.
Chen, H.W. and Chang, N.B. (2006) ‘Decision support for allocation of watershed pollution load
using grey fuzzy multiobjective programming’, Journal of the American Water Resources
Association, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp.725–745.
Cheng, Sh-H., Chang, H., Chen, Y-H., Chen, H-J., Chao Y-K. and Liao, Y-H. (2010)
‘Computational fluid dynamics-based multiobjective optimization for catalyst design’,
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, In Press.
Cheng, Sh-H., Chen, H-J. Chang, H., Chang, Ch-K. and Chen, Y-M. (2008) ‘Multi-objective
optimization for two catalytic membrane reactors – methanol synthesis and hydrogen
production’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 63, No. 6, pp.1428–1437.
Chipperfield, A.J. and Fleming, P.J. (1996) ‘Multiobjective gas turbine engine controller design
using genetic algorithms’, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 43, No. 5.
Chipperfield, A.J., Bica, B. and Fleming, P.J. (2002) ‘Fuzzy scheduling control of a gas turbine
aero-engine: a multiobjective approach’, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics,
Vol. 49, No. 3, pp.536–548.
Christou, M.D. and Mattarelli, M. (2000) ‘Land-use planning in the vicinity of chemical sites:
risk-informed decision making at a local community level’, Journal of Hazardous Materials,
Vol. 78, pp.191–222.
Chui, F., Elkamel, A. and Fowler, M. (2006) ‘An integrated decision support framework
for the assessment and analysis of hydrogen production pathways’, Energy & Fuels, Vol. 20,
pp.346–352.
Ciric, A.R. and Huchette, S.G. (1993) ‘Multiobjective optimization approach to sensitivity analysis:
waste treatment costs in discrete process synthesis and optimization problems’, Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 32, pp.2636–2646.
Covas, J.A., Cunha, A.G. and Oliveira, P. (1999) ‘An optimization approach to practical problems
in plasticating single screw extrusion’, Polymer Engineering and Science, Vol. 39, No. 3,
pp.443–456.
Cowling, P. (2003) ‘A flexible decision support system for steel hot rolling mill scheduling’,
Computers and Industrial Engineering, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp.307–321.
Cunha, A.G., Covas, J.A. and Oliveira, P. (1998) ‘Optimization of polymer extrusion with
genetic algorithms’, IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, Vol. 9,
pp.267–277.
Curteanu, S., Leon, F. and Galea, D. (2006) ‘Alternatives for multiobjective optimization of a
polymerization process’, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 100, No. 5, pp.3680–3695.
Cziner, K. and Hurme, M. (2003) ‘Process evaluation and synthesis by analytic hierarchy process
combined with genetic optimization’, Computer-Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 15B,
pp.778–783.
Cziner, K., Hassim, M.H. and Hurme, M. (2006) ‘Multicriteria design of separation sequences by
including HSE criteria and uncertainty’, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 21,
pp.1149–1154.
Czyzak, P. and Jaszkiewicz, A. (1996) ‘A multiobjective metaheuristic approach to the localization
of a chain of petrol stations by the capital budgeting model’, Control and Cybernetics,
Vol. 25, No. 1, pp.177–187.
Dantus, M.M. and High, K.A. (1999) ‘Evaluation of waste minimization alternatives under
uncertainty: a multiobjective optimization approach’, Computers & Chemical Engineering,
Vol. 23, No. 10, pp.1493–1508.
De Boer, J.H., Smilde, A.K. and Doornbos, D.A. (1988) ‘Introduction of multi-criteria decision
making in optimization procedures for pharmaceutical formulations’, Acta Pharmaceutica
Technologica, Vol. 34, pp.140–143.
De Boer, J.H., Bolhuis, G.K. and Doornbos, D.A. (1991) ‘Comparative evaluation of multi-criteria
decision making and combined contour plots in optimization of directly compressed tablets’,
European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics, Vol. 37, pp.159–165.
Deb, K., Mitra, K., Dewri, R. and Majumdar, S. (2004a) ‘Towards a better understanding of the
epoxy polymerization process using multi-objective evolutionary computation’, Chemical
Engineering Science, Vol. 59, No. 20, pp.4261–4277.
Deb, K., Mitra, K., Dewri, R. and Majumdar, S. (2004b) ‘Unveiling optimal operating conditions
for an epoxy polymerization process using multi-objective evolutionary computation’, Lecture
Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3103, pp.920–931.
Delhaye, C., Teghem, J. and Kunsch, P. (1991) ‘Application of the ORESTE method to a nuclear
waste management problem’, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 24,
Nos. 1–2, pp.29–39.
Deming, S.N. (1991) ‘Multiple-criteria optimization’, Journal of Chromatography, Vol. 550,
pp.15–25.
Dey, P.K. (2004) ‘Decision support system for inspection and maintenance of cross-country
petroleum pipeline’, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 51, No. 1,
pp.47–56.
Dey, P.K. (2006) ‘Integrated project evaluation and selection using multiple-attribute
decision-making technique’, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 103,
pp.90–103.
Dey, P.K. and Gupta, S.S. (1999) ‘Decision support system for pipeline route selection’, Cost
Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 10, pp.29–35.
Dey, P.K. and Gupta, S.S. (2000) ‘Analytic hierarchy process boosts risk analysis objectivity’,
Pipeline and Gas Industry Journal, Vol. 83, No. 9, pp.6–72.
Dey, P.K. and Gupta, S.S. (2001) ‘Feasibility analysis of cross country pipeline projects: a
quantitative approach’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp.50–58.
Dey, P.K., Tabucanon, M.T. and Ogunlana, S.O. (1994) ‘Planning for project control through risk
analysis: a case of petroleum pipeline laying project’, International Journal of Project
Management, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.23–33.
Dey, P.K., Tabucanon, M.T. and Ogunlana, S.O. (1996) ‘Petroleum pipeline construction planning:
a conceptual framework’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14, No. 4,
pp.231–240.
Dey, P.K., Ogunlana, S.O., Gupta, S.S. and Tabucanon, M.T. (1998) ‘A risk based maintenance
model for cross-country pipelines’, Cost Engineering, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp.24–31.
Dietz, A., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Pibouleau, L. and Domenech, S. (2006) ‘Multiobjective optimization
for multiproduct batch plant design under economic and environmental considerations’,
Dietz, A., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Pibouleau, L. and Domenech, S. (2007) ‘Optimal design of batch
plants under economic and ecological considerations: application to a biochemical batch
plant’, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 46, Nos. 1–2, pp.109–123.
Dimkou, T.I. and Papalexandri, K.P. (1998) ‘A parametric optimization approach for
multiobjective engineering problems involving discrete decisions’, Computers and Chemical
Engineering, Vol. 22, Supplement 1, pp.S951–S954.
Dimopoulos, C. (2007) ‘Explicit consideration of multiple objective in cellular manufacturing’,
Engineering Optimization, Vol. 39, No 5, pp.551–565.
Dinca, C., Badea, A., Rousseaux, P. and Apostol, T. (2007) ‘A multi-criteria approach to evaluate
the natural gas energy systems’, Energy Policy, Vol. 35, No. 11, pp.5754–5765.
Doukas, H.Ch., Andreas, B.A. and Psarras, J.A. (2007) ‘Multi-criteria decision aid for the
formulation of sustainable technological energy priorities using linguistic variables’, European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 182, No. 2, pp.844–855.
Dutta, G., Fourer, R., Majumdar, A. and Dutta, D. (2007) An Optimization-Based Decision Support
System for Strategic Planning in a Process Industry: The Case of a Pharmaceutical.
Dyer, J.S., Lund, R.N., Larsen, J.B., Kumar, V. and Leone, R.P. (1990) ‘A decision support system
for prioritizing oil and gas exploration activities’, Operations Research, Vol. 38, No. 3,
pp.386–396.
Dyer, J.S., Edmunds, T., Butler, J.C. and Jia, J. (1998) ‘A multiattribute utility analysis of
alternatives for the disposition of surplus weapons-grade plutonium’, Operations Research,
Vol. 46, No. 6, pp.749–762.
Ehrhardt, J. (1997) ‘The RODOS system: decision support for off-site emergency management in
Europe’, Radiation Protection Dosimetry, Vol. 73, pp.35–40.
Ehrhardt, J., Präsler-Sauer, J., Schüle, O., Benz, G., Rafat, M. and Richter, J. (1993) ‘Development
of RODOS, a comprehensive decision support system for nuclear emergencies in Europe – an
overview’, Radiation Protection Dosimetry, Vol. 109, Nos. 1–2, pp.63–67.
Ehrhardt, J., Brown, J., French, S., Kelly, G.N., Mikkelsen, T. and Muller, H. (1997), RODOS:
decision-making support for off-site emergency management after nuclear accidents’,
Kerntechnik, Vol. 62, Nos. 2–3, pp.122–128.
Elkarmi, F. and Mustafa, I. (1993) ‘Increasing the utilization of solar energy technologies (SET) in
Jordan: analytic hierarchy process’, Energy Policy, Vol. 21, pp.978–982.
Erdogdu, F. (2003) ‘Complex method for nonlinear constrained multi-criteria (multi-objective
function) optimization of thermal processing’, Journal of Food Process Engineering, Vol. 26,
No. 4, pp.357–375.
Eugene, R. and Dey, P.K. (2005) ‘The role of environmental factors in industrial site selection
activities: a case of limestone quarry expansion in Barbados’, Impact Assessment and Project
Appraisal, Vol. 23, No. 2.
Farid, S.S., Washbrook, J. and Titchener-Hooker, N.J. (2005) ‘Decision-support tool for assessing
biomanufacturing strategies under uncertainty: stainless steel versus disposable equipment for
clinical trial material preparation’, Biotechnology Progress, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.486–497.
Fazil, A., Rajic, A., Sanchez, J. and McEwen, S. (2008) ‘Choices, choices: the application of
multi-criteria decision analysis to a food safety decision-making problem’, Journal of Food
Protection, Vol. 71, No. 11, pp.2323–2333.
Ferreira, D., Suslick, S., Farley, J., Costanza, R. and Krivov, S. (2004) ‘A decision model for
financial assurance instruments in the upstream petroleum sector’, Energy Policy, Vol. 32,
No. 10, pp.1173–1184.
Flores-Alsina, X., Rodriguez-Roda, I., Sin, G. and Gernaey, K.V. (2008) ‘Multi-criteria evaluation
of wastewater treatment plant control strategies under uncertainty’, Water Research, Vol. 42,
No. 17, pp.4485–4497.
Fogliatto, F.S. and Albin, S.L. (2003) ‘An AHP-based procedure for sensory data collection and
analysis in quality and reliability applications’, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 14,
pp.375–385.
Foli, K., Okabe, T., Olhofer, M., Jin, Y. and Sendhoff, B. (2006) ‘Optimization of micro heat
exchanger: CFD, analytical approach and multi-objective evolutionary algorithms’,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 49, Nos. 5–6, pp.1090–1099.
Fonteix, C., Massebeuf, S., Pla, F. and Kiss, L.N. (2004) ‘Multicriteria optimization of an emulsion
polymerization process’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153, No. 2,
pp.350–359.
French, S. (1996) ‘Multi-attribute decision support in the event of a nuclear accident’, Journal of
Multi Criteria Decision Analysis, Vol. 5, pp.39–57.
Frombo, F., Minciardi, R., Robba, M., Rosso, F. and Sacile, R. (2009a) ‘Planning woody biomass
logistics for energy production: a strategic decision model’, Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 33,
No. 3, pp.372–383.
Frombo, F., Minciardi, R., Robba, M. and Sacile, R. (2009b) ‘A decision support system for
planning biomass-based energy production’, Energy, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp.362–369.
Frysinger, S.P., Deaton, M.L., Gonzalo, A.G., VanHorn, A.M. and Kirk, M.A. (2007) ‘The
FALCON decision support system: preparing communities for weapons of opportunity’,
Environmental Modelling & Software, Vol. 22, No. 4, pp.431–435.
Garg, S. and Gupta, S.K. (1999) ‘Multiobjective optimization of a free radical bulk polymerization
reactor using genetic algorithm’, Macromolecular Theory and Simulations, Vol. 8, No. 1,
pp.46–53.
Gaspar-Cunha, A. (2005) ‘A multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for solving traveling salesman
oriblems: application to the design of polymer extruders, Adaptive and Natural Computing
Algorithms, Vol. 2, pp.189–193.
Gaspar-Cunha, A., Covas, J.A. and Vergnes, B. (2005) ‘efining the configuration of co-rotating
twin-screw extruders with multiobjective evolutionary algorithms’, Polymer Engineering and
Science, Vol. 45, No. 8, pp.1159–1173.
Gaspar-Cunha, A., Poulesquen, A., Vergnes, B. and Covas, J.A. (2002) ‘Optimization of
processing conditions for polymer twin-screw extrusion’, International Polymer Processing,
Vol. 17, No. 3, pp.201–213.
Geldermann, J. and Rentz, O. (2005) ‘Multi-criteria analysis for technique assessment: case study
from industrial coating’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp.127–142.
Geldermann, J., Spengler, T. and Rentz, O. (2000) ‘Fuzzy outranking for environmental
assessment. Case study: iron and steel making industry’, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 115,
pp.45–65.
Geldermann, J., Bertsch, V., Treitz, M., French, S., Papamichail, K.N. and Hämäläinen, R.P.
(2009) ‘Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation
management’, Omega, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp.238–251.
Geng, L., Chen, Z., Chan, C.W. and Huang, G.H. (2001) ‘An intelligent decision support system
for management of petroleum contaminated sites’, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 20,
pp.251–260.
George, E., Titchener-Hooker, N.J. and Farid, S.S. (2007) ‘A multi-criteria decision-making
framework for the selection of strategies for acquiring biopharmaceutical manufacturing’,
Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 31, No. 8, pp.889–901.
Georgopoulou, E., Lalas, D. and Papagiannakis, L. (1997) ‘A multicriteria decision aid approach
for energy planning problems: the case of renewable energy option’, European Journal of
Georgopoulou, E., Sarafidis, Y., Mirasgedis, S., Zaimi, S. and Lalas, D.P. (2003) ‘A multiple
criteria decision-aid approach in defining national priorities for greenhouse gases emissions
reduction in the energy sector’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 146,
pp.199–215.
Ghosh, S., Mitra, K., Basu, B. and Jategaonkar, Y.A. (2004) ‘Control of meniscus-level fluctuation
by optimization of spray cooling in an industrial thin slab casting machine using a genetic
algorithm’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp.549–562.
Goel, H.D., Grievink, J., Herder, P.M. and Weijnen, M.P.C. (2002) ‘Integrating reliability
optimization into chemical process synthesis’, Reliability Engineering and System Safety,
Vol. 78, pp.247–258.
Goumas, M. and Lygerou, V. (2000) ‘An extension of the PROMETHEE method for decision
making in fuzzy environment: ranking of alternative energy exploitation’, European Journal
of Operational Research, Vol. 123, No. 3, pp.606–613.
Grandinetti, L., Guerriero, F., Lepera, G. and Mancini, M. (2007) ‘A niched genetic algorithm to
solve a pollutant emission reduction problem in the manufacturing industry: a case study’,
Computers & Operations Research, Vol. 34, No. 7, pp.2191–2214.
Gujarathi, A.M. and Babu, B.V. (2010) ‘Hybrid multi-objective differential evolution (H-MODE)
for optimisation of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) reactor’, International Journal of
Bio-Inspired Computation, Vol. 2, Nos. 3–4, pp.213–221.
Gumus, A.T. (2009) ‘Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step
fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology’, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 2,
pp.4067–4074.
Guo, Y., Walters, G.A., Khu, S.T. and Keedwell, E. (2007) ‘A novel cellular automata based
approach to storm sewer design’, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp.345–364.
Gupta, R.R. and Gupta, S.K. (1998) ‘Multiobjective optimization of an industrial nylon-6
semibatch reactor system using genetic algorithm’, Journal of Applied Polymer Science,
Vol. 73, No. 5, pp.729–739.
Guria, Ch., Bhattacharya, P.K. and Gupta, S.K. (2005a) ‘Multi-objective optimization of reverse
osmosis desalination units using different adaptations of the non-dominated sorting genetic
algorithm (NSGA)’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 29, pp.1977–1995.
Guria, C., Verma, M., Mehrotra, S.P. and Gupta, S.K. (2005b) ‘Multi-objective optimal synthesis
and design of froth flotation circuits for mineral processing, using the jumping gene adaptation
of genetic algorithm’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 44, No. 8,
pp.2621–2633.
Hadjmohammadi, M.R. and Safa, F. (2004) ‘Multi-criteria decision making in micellar liquid
chromatographic separation of chlorophenols’, Journal of Separation Science, Vol. 27,
pp.997–1004.
Hajeeh, M. and Al-Othman, A. (2005) ‘Application of the analytical hierarchy process in the
selection of desalination plants’, Desalination, Vol. 174, pp.97–108.
Halsall-Whitney, H. and Thibault, J. (2006) ‘Multi-objective optimization for chemical processes
and controller design: approximating and classifying the Pareto domain’, Computers and
Chemical Engineering, Vol. 30, Nos. 6–7, pp.1155–1168.
Hämäläinen, R.P. (1990) ‘A decision aid in the public debate on nuclear power’, European Journal
of Operational Research, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp.66–76.
Hämäläinen, R.P., Lindstedt, M. and Sinkko, K. (2000) ‘Multi-attribute risk analysis in nuclear
emergency management’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp.455–468.
Hanratty, P.J. and Joseph, B. (1992) ‘Decision-making in chemical engineering and expert systems:
application of the analytical hierarchy process to reactor selection’, Computers Chemical
Hardie, R.W., Thayer, G.R. and Barrera-Roldán, A. (1995) ‘Development of a methodology for
evaluating air pollution options for improving the air quality in Mexico City’, Science of the
Total Environment, Vol. 169, Nos. 1–3, pp.295–301.
Hendriks, M.M.W.B., De Boer, J.H., Smilde, A.K. and Doornbos, D.A. (1992) ‘Multicriteria
decision making’, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, Vol. 16, pp.175–191.
Herngren, L., Goonetilleke, A. and Ayoko, G.A. (2006) ‘Analysis of heavy metals in
road-deposited sediments’, Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 571, pp.270–278.
Hobeika, A.G., Kim, S. and Beckwith, R.E. (1994) ‘A decision support system for developing
evacuation plans around nuclear power stations’, Interfaces, Vol. 24, No. 5, pp.22–35.
Hodge, B.M., Pettersson, F. and Chakraborti, N. (2006) ‘Re-evaluation of the optimal operating
conditions for the primary end of an integrated steel plant using multi-objective genetic
algorithms and Nash equilibrium’, Steel Research International, Vol. 77, No. 7, pp.459–461.
Hoffmann, V.H., Hungerbühler, K. and Gregory, J.M. (2001) ‘Multiobjective screening and
evaluation of chemical process technologies’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
Vol. 40, pp.4513–4524.
Hoffmann, V.H., McRae, G.J. and Hungerbühler, K. (2004) ‘Methodology for early-stage
technology assessment and decision making under uncertainty: application to the selection of
chemical processes’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 43, pp.4337–4349.
Hongwei, Y., Zhanpeng, J., Shaoqi, S. and Ruihua, L. (2004) ‘Integrated assessment for anaerobic
biodegradability of organic compounds using the analytical hierarchy process’, Ecotoxicology
and Environmental Safety, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp.249–255.
Hongye, S., Weifeng, H., Shengjing, M. and Jian, Ch. (2003) ‘Multi-objective optimization of
industrial purified terephthalic acid oxidation process’, Chinese Journal of Chemical
Hosseini, J. (1986) ‘Decision analysis and its application in the choice between two wildcat oil
ventures’, Interfaces, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.75–85.
Hou, WF., Su, H.Y., Mu, S.J. et al. (2007) ‘Multiobjective optimization of the industrial naphtha
catalytic reforming process’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 1,
pp.75–80.
Hsu, C-M. and Su, C-T. (1998) ‘Multi-objective machine-component grouping in cellular
manufacturing: a genetic algorithm’, Production Planning and Control, Vol. 9, No. 2,
pp.155–166.
Huang, H-J. and Wang, F-S. (2002) ‘Fuzzy decision-making design of chemical plant using
mixed-integer hybrid differential evolution’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 26,
No. 12, pp.1649–1660.
Inamdar, S.V., Gupta, S.K. and Saraf, D.N. (2004) ‘Multi-objective optimization of an industrial
crude distillation unit using the elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Chemical
Engineering Research and Design, Vol. 82, No. 5, pp.611–623.
Insua, D.R., Gallego, E., Mateos, A. and Ríos-Insua, S. (2000) ‘MOIRA: a decision support system
for decision making on aquatic ecosystems contaminated by radioactive fallout’, Annals of
Operations Research, Vol. 95, Nos. 1–4, pp.341–364.
Ito, K., Akagi, S. and Nishikawa, M. (1983) ‘A multiobjective optimization approach to a design
problem of heat insulation for thermal distribution piping network systems’, Journal of
Mechanisms, Transmissions and Automation in Design (Transactions of the ASME), Vol. 105,
pp.206–213.
Jager, K., Peemoller, W. and Rohde, M. (1989) ‘A decision support system for planning chemical
production of active ingredients in a pharmaceutical company’, Engineering Costs and
Production Economics, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp.377–387.
Jia, Y., Sun, S., Liu, L., Mu, Y. and An, L. (2004) ‘Design of silicone rubber according to
requirements based on the multi-objective optimization of chemical reactions’, ACTA
Materialia, Vol. 52, No. 14, pp.4153–4159.
Judd, B.R. and Weissenberger, S. (1982) ‘A systematic approach to nuclear safeguards

decision-making’, Management Science, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp.289–302.
Kachhap, R. and Guria, C. (2005) Multi-objective optimization of a batch copoly
(ethylene-polyoxyethylene terephthalate) reactor using different adaptations of nondominated
sorting genetic algorithm’, Macromolecular Theory and Simulations, Vol. 14, No. 6,
pp.358–373.
Kafka, P. and Polke, H. (1988) ‘Intelligent decision aids for abnormal events in nuclear power
plants’, Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, Vol. 22, Nos. 1–4, pp.355–370.
Kalogeras, N., Baourakis, G., Zopounidis, C. and van Dijk, G. (2005) ‘Evaluating the financial
performance of agri-food firms: a multicriteria decision-aid approach’, Journal of Food
Kalu, T.C.U. (1998) ‘Domestic petroleum-related expertise utilization and Nigeria’s oil industry
survival: a multicriteria decision analysis’, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 110, No. 3, pp.457–473.
Karagiannidis, A. and Perkoulidis, G. (2009) ‘A multi-criteria ranking of different technologies for
the anaerobic digestion for energy recovery of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes’,
Bioresource Technology, Vol. 100, No. 8, pp.2355–2360.
Karatzas, K., Dioudi, E. and Moussiopoulos, N. (2003) ‘Identification of major components for
integrated urban air quality management and information systems via user requirements
prioritization’, Environmental Modelling & Software, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp.173–178.
Kariuki, S.G. and Löwe, K. (2006) ‘Increasing human reliability in the chemical process industry
using human factors techniques’, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, Vol. 84,
No. 3, pp.200–207.
Kasat, K.B. and Gupta, S.K. (2003) ‘Multi-objective optimization of an industrial fluidized-bed
catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) using genetic algorithm (GA) with the jumping genes
operator’, Computers & Chemical Engineering, Vol. 27, No. 12, pp.1785–1800.
Kasat, R.B., Kunzru, D., Saraf, D.N. and Gupta, S.K. (2002) ‘Multiobjective optimization of
industrial FCC unit using elitist nondominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Industrial and
Kasat, K.B., Ray, A.K. and Gupta, S.K. (2003) ‘Applications of genetic algorithm in polymer
science and engineering’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 18, No. 3,
pp.523–532.
Keller, H.R., Massart, D.L. and Brans, J.P. (1991) ‘Multicriteria decision making: a case study’,
Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.175–189.
Kelly, G.N., Ehrhardt, J. and Shershakov, V.M. (1996) ‘Decision support for off-site emergency
preparedness in Europe’, Radiation Protection Dosimetry, Vol. 64, Nos. 1–2, pp.129–141.
Khalil, W.Al-S., Goonetilleke, A., Kokot, S. and Carroll, S. (2004) ‘Use of chemometrics methods
and multicriteria decision-making for site selection for sustainable on-site sewage effluent
disposal’, Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 506, No. 1, pp.41–56.
Khalil, W.Al-S., Shanableh, A., Rigby, P. and Kokot, S. (2005) ‘Selection of hydrothermal pre-
treatment conditions of waste sludge destruction using multicriteria decision-making’, Journal
of Environmental Management, Vol. 75, No. 1, pp.53–64.
Khelifi, O., Giovanna, F.D., Vranes, S., Lodolo, A. and Miertus, S. (2006) ‘Decision support tool
for used oil regeneration technologies assessment and selection’, Journal of Hazardous
Materials, Vol. 137, No. 1, pp.437–442.
Kim, K.J. and Smith, R.L. (2004) ‘Parallel multiobjective evolutionary algorithms for waste solvent
recycling’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 43, No. 11, pp.2669–2679.
Kim, S.K. and Song, O. (2009) ‘A MAUT approach for selecting a dismantling scenario for the
thermal column in KRR-1’, Annals of Nuclear Energy, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.145–150.
Kim, P.O., Lee, K.J. and Lee B.W. (1999) ‘Selection of an optimal nuclear fuel cycle scenario by
goal programming and the analytic hierarchy process’, Annals of Nuclear Energy, Vol. 26,
No. 5, pp.449–460.
Kim, D., Kim, J. and Moon, I. (2006) ‘Integration of accident scenario generation and
multiobjective optimization for safety-cost decision making in chemical’, Journal of Loss
Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 19,No. 6, pp.705–713.
Kiranoudis, C.T. and Markatos, N.C. (2000) ‘Pareto design of conveyor-belt dryers, Journal of
Food Engineering, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp.145–155.
Ko, D. and Moon, I. (2002) ‘Multiobjective optimization of cyclic adsorption processes’, Industrial
& Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 41, pp.93–104.
Kokot, S. and Phuong, T.D. (1999) ‘Elemental content of Vietnamese rice. Part 2: multivariate data
analysis’, Analyst, Vol. 124, pp.561–569.
Kokot, S., Kmg, G., Keller, H.R. and Massart, D.L. (1992) ‘Application of chemometrics
for the selection of microwave digestion procedures’, Analytica Chemica Acta, Vol. 268,
pp.81–94.
Korner, O. and Van Straten, G. (2008) ‘Decision support for dynamic greenhouse climate control
strategies’, Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp.18–30.
Kreczko, A., Evans, N. and Hope C. (1987) ‘A decision analysis of the commercial demonstration
fast reactor’, Energy Policy, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp.303–314.
Kritpiphat, W., Tontiwachwuthikul, P. and Chan, Ch.W. (1998) ‘Pipeline network modeling and
simulation for intelligent monitoring and control: a case study of a municipal water supply
system’, Industrial Engineering Chemical Research, Vol. 37, No. 3, pp.1033–1044.
Krokida, M.K. and Kiranoudis, C.T. (2000) ‘Pareto design of fluidized bed dryers’, Chemical
Engineering Journal, Vol. 79, pp.1–12.
Kumar, A., Sahoo, D., Chakraborty, S. and Chakraborti, N. (2005) ‘Gas injection in steelmaking
vessels: coupling a fluid dynamic analysis with a genetic algorithms-based pareto-optimality’,
Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp.363–379.
Kumar, A., Sokhansanj, S. and Flynn, P.C. (2006) ‘Development of a multicriteria assessment
model for ranking biomass feedstock collection and transportation systems’, Applied
Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Vols. 129–132, pp.71–87.
Kundu, P.K., Zhang, Y. and Ray, A.K. (2009) ‘Multi-objective optimization of simulated
countercurrent moving bed chromatographic reactor for oxidative coupling of methane’,
Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 64, No. 19, pp.4137–4149.
Kunsch, P.L. and Teghem, J., Jr. (1987) ‘Nuclear fuel cycle optimization using multi-objective
stochastic linear programming’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 31, No. 2,
pp.240–249.
Kurup, A.S., Hidajat, K. and Ray, A.K. (2006) ‘Comparative study of modified simulated moving
bed systems at optimal conditions for the separation of ternary mixtures of xylene isomers’,
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 45, No. 18, pp.6251–6265.
Lathrop, J.W. and Watson, S.R. (1982) ‘Decision analysis for the evaluation of risk in nuclear
waste management’, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 33, pp.407–418.
Lazzaretto, A. and Toffolo, A. (2004) ‘Energy, economy and environment as objectives
in multi-criterion optimization of thermal systems design’, Energy, Vol. 29, No. 8,
pp.1139–1157.
Lee, F.Ch., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2007) ‘Multi-objective optimization of an industrial
penicillin V bioreactor train using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Biotechnology
and Bioengineering, Vol. 98, No. 3, pp.586–598.
Lee, S.K., Yoon, Y.J. and Kim, J.W. (2007) ‘A study on making a long-term improvement in the
national energy efficiency and GHG control plans by the AHP approach’, Energy Policy,
Vol. 35, pp.2862–2868.
Lee, S.K., Mogi, G., Kim, J.W. and Gim, B.J. (2008a) ‘A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process
approach for assessing national competitiveness in the hydrogen technology sector’,
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 33, No. 23, pp.6840–6848.
Lee, S.K., Mogi, G. and Kim, J.W. (2008b) ‘The competitiveness of Korea as a
developer of hydrogen energy technology: the AHP approach’, Energy Policy, Vol. 36, No. 4,
pp.1284–1291.
Lee, S.K. Mogi, G. and Kim, J.W. (2009) ‘Decision support for prioritizing energy technologies
against high oil prices: a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach’, Journal of Loss
Prevention in the Process Industries, Article in press, doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2009.07.001.
Lerche, D., Brüggemann, R., Sørensen, P.B., Carlsen, L. and Nielsen, O.J. (2002) ‘A comparison of
partial order technique with three methods of multi-criteria analysis for ranking of
chemical substances’, Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, Vol. 42,
pp.1086–1098.
Lewi, P.J., Hoof, J.V. and Boey, P. (1992) ‘Multicriteria decision making using Pareto optimality
and PROMETHEE preference ranking’, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems,
Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.139–144.
Li. S. and Lou. H.H. (2008) ‘A strategy for multi-objective optimization under uncertainty in
chemical process design’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 1,
pp.39–42.
Li, C., Zhang, X. and Zhang, S. (2006) ‘Environmental benign design of DMC production process’,
Chemical Engineering Research and Design, Vol. 84, No. 1, pp.1–8.
Li, C., Zhang, X., Zhang, S. and Suzuki, K. (2009) ‘Environmentally conscious design of chemical
processes and products: multi-optimization method’, Chemical Engineering Research and
Design, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp.233–243.
Li, S., Fan X. and Yao, P. (2003) ‘Study on multi-objective fuzzy optimization algorithm for
chemical process’, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 15, pp.1370–1375.
Li, Sh., Wang, H., Yang, Y. and Qian, F. (2003) ‘Multi-objective programming in refinery planning
optimization’, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, Vol. 15, pp.523–528.
Lim, Y., Floquet, P., Joulia, X. and Kim, S.D. (1999) ‘Multiobjective optimization in terms of
economics and potential environment impact for process design and analysis in a chemical
process simulator’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 38, pp.4729–4741.
Lim, M.C.H., Ayoko, G.A. and Morawska, L. (2005) ‘Characterization of elemental and polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbon compositions of urban air in Brisbane’, Atmospheric Environment,
Vol. 39, pp.463–476.
Lim, M.C.H., Ayoko, G.A., Morawska, L., Ristovski, Z.D., Jayaratne, E.R. and Kokot, S. (2006)
‘A comparative study of the elemental composition of the exhaust emissions of cars
powered by liquefied petroleum gas and unleaded petrol’, Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 40,
pp.3111–3122.
Lim, M.C.H., Ayoko, G.A., Morawska, L., Ristovski, Z.D. and Jayaratne, E.R. (2007a) ‘The effects
of fuel characteristics and engine operating conditions on the elemental composition of
emissions from heavy duty diesel buses’, Fuel, Vol. 86, pp.1831–1839.
Lim, M.C.H., Ayoko, G.A., Morawska, L., Ristovski, Z.D. and Jayaratne, E.R. (2007b) ‘Influence
of fuel composition on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon emissions from a fleet of in-service
passenger cars’, Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 41, pp.150–160.
Lincoln, D.R. and Rubin, E.S. (1979) ‘Cross-media environmental impacts of coal-fired plants: an
approach using multi-attribute utility theory’, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and
Cybernetics SMC-9, pp.285–289.
Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F.K., Steevens, J., Ferguson, E. and Pleus, R.C. (2007) ‘Multi-criteria
decision analysis and environmental risk assessment for nanomaterials’, Journal of
Nanoparticle Research, Vol. 9, pp.543–554.
Linkov, I., Satterstrom, F.K. and Corey, L.M. (2008) ‘Nanotoxicology and nanomedicine: making
hard decisions’, Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine, Vol. 4, pp.167–171.
Logist, F., van Erdeghem, P.M.M. and van Impe, J.F. (2009) ‘Efficient deterministic multiple
objective optimal control of (bio) chemical processes’, Chemical Engineering Science,
Vol. 64, pp.2527–2538.
Loulou, R. and Kanudia, A. (1999) ‘Minimax regret strategies for greenhouse gas abatement:
methodology and application’, Operations Research Letters, Vol. 25, pp.219–230.
Madu, C.N., Kuei, C. and Madu, I.E. (2002) ‘A hierarchic metric approach for integration of green
issues in manufacturing: a paper recycling application’, Journal of Environmental
Management, Vol. 64, pp.261–272.
Mahdipoor, H.R. (2006) ‘Flow pattern recognition in tray columns with MADM (multiple
attribute decision making) method’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 30, No. 6,
pp.1197–1200.
Mahfouf, M., Jamei, M. and Linkens, D.A. (2005) ‘Optimal design of alloy steels using
multiobjective genetic algorithms’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 20, No. 3,
pp.553–567.
Majumdar, R.S. and Mitra, K. (2004a) ‘Effect of caustic addition in epoxy polymerization process:
a single and multiobjective evolutionary approach’, Macromolecular Theory and Simulations,
Vol. 13, pp.152–161.
Majumdar, S. and Mitra, K. (2004b) ‘Modeling of a reaction network and its optimization by
genetic algorithm’, Chemical Engineering Journal, Vol. 100, Nos. 1–3, pp.109–118.
Majumdar, S., Mitra, K. and Raha, S. (2005a) ‘Optimized species growth in epoxy polymerization
with real-coded NSGA-II’, Polymer, Vol. 46, pp.11858–11869.
Majumdar, S., Mitra, K. and Sardar, G. (2005b) ‘Kinetic analysis and optimization for the catalytic
esterification step of PPT polymerization’, Macromolecular Theory and Simulations, Vol. 14,
No. 1, pp.49-59.
Mamlook, R. and Badran, O. (2007) ‘Fuzzy sets implementation for the evaluation of factors
affecting solar still production’, Desalination, Vol. 203, pp.394–402.
Manne, A.S. and Richels, R.G. (1978) ‘A decision analysis of the US breeder reactor program’,
Energy, Vol. 3, pp.747–767.
Mansouri, S.A., Moattar-Husseini, S.M. and Zegordi, S.H. (2003) ‘A genetic algorithm for multiple
objective dealing with exceptional elements in cellular manufacturing’, Production Planning
& Control, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp.437–446.
Massebeuf, S., Fonteix, C., Hoppe, S. and Pla, F. (2003) ‘Development of new concepts for the
control of polymerization processes: multiobjective optimization and decision engineering. I.
Application to emulsion homopolymerization of styrene’, Journal of Applied Polymer Science,
Vol. 87, No. 14, pp.2383–2396.
Mavrotas, G. and Diakoulaki, D. (2005) ‘Solving multiobjective MILP problems in process
synthesis using the multi-criteria branch and bound algorithm’, Chemical Engineering and
Technology, Vol. 28, No. 12, pp.1500–1510.
Mavrotas, G., Georgopoulou, E., Mirasgedis, S., Sarafidis, Y., Lalas, D., Hontou, V. and Gakis, N.
(2007) ‘An integrated approach for the selection of best available techniques (BAT) for the
industries in the greater Athens area using multiobjective combinatorial optimization’, Energy
Economics, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp.953–973.
Mavrotas, G., Ziomas, Y. and Diakoulaki, D. (2006) ‘A combined MOIP – MCDA approach to
building and screening atmospheric pollution control strategies in urban regions’,
Environmental Management, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp.149–160.
McMeekin, T.A., Baranyi, J., Bowman, J., Dalgaard, P., Kirk, M., Ross, T., Schmid, S. and
Zwietering, M.H. (2006) ‘Information systems in food safety management’, International
Journal of Food Microbiology, Vol. 112, pp.181–194.
Merkhofer, M.W. and Keeney, R.L. (1987) ‘A multiattribute utility analysis of alternative sites for
the disposal of nuclear waste’, Risk Analysis, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.173–194.
Merquior, D.M., Fontoura, J.M.R., Pinto, J.C. and Lima, E.L. (2001) ‘Studies of multiobjective
optimization of batch free-radical polymerization process’, Latin American Applied Research,
Vol. 31, No. 5, pp.513–517.
Mistretta, M. Cellura, M. and Beccali, G. (2003) ‘New exergy criterion in the ‘multi-criteria’
context: a life cycle assessment of two plaster products’, Energy Conversion and
Mitra, K. and Gopinath, R. (2004) ‘Multiobjective optimization of an industrial grinding operation
using elitist nondominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 59,
No. 2, pp.385–396.
Mitra, K. and Majumdar, S. (2007) ‘Multicriteria optimal control of polypropylene terepthalate
polymerization reactor’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp.532–540.
Mitra, K., Deb, K. and Gupta, S.K. (1998) ‘Multiobjective dynamic optimization of an industrial
nylon 6 semibatch reactor using genetic algorithm’, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, Vol.
69, No. 1, pp.69–87.
Mitra, K., Majumdar, S. and Raha S. (2004a) ‘Multiobjective optimization of a semibatch epoxy
polymerization process using the elitist genetic algorithm’, Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry Research, Vol. 43, No. 19, pp.6055–6063.
Mitra, K., Majumdar, S. and Raha, S. (2004b) ‘Multiobjective dynamic optimization of a
semi-batch epoxy polymerization process’, Computers & Chemical Engineering, Vol. 28,
No. 12, pp.2583–2594.
Mohanty, S. (2006) ‘Multiobjective optimization of synthesis gas production using non-dominated
sorting genetic algorithm’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 30, Nos. 6–7,
pp.1019–1025.
Mohsen, M.S. and Al-Jayyousi, O.R. (1999) ‘Brackish water desalination: an alternative for water
supply enhancement in Jordan’, Desalination, Vol. 124, pp.163–174.
Mohsen, M.S. and Akash, B.A. (1997) ‘Evaluation of domestic solar water heating system in
Jordan using analytic hierarchy process’, Energy Conversion and Management, Vol. 38,
No. 18, pp.1815–1822.
Mu, S.J., Su, H.Y., Gu, Y. and Chu, J. (2003) ‘Multi-objective optimization of industrial purified
terephthalic acid oxidation process’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 11,
No. 5, pp.536–541.
Mu, S., Su, H., Jia, T., Gu, Y. and Chu, J. (2004) ‘Scalable multi-objective optimization of
industrial purified terephthalic acid (PTA) oxidation process’, Computers & Chemical
Muniglia, L., Kiss, L.N., Fonteix, C. and Marc, I. (2004) ‘Multicriteria optimization of a single-cell
oil production’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153, No. 2, pp.360–369.
Murthy, Z.V.P. and Vengal, J.C. (2006) ‘Optimization of a reverse osmosis system using genetic
algorithm’, Separation Science and Technology, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp.647–663.
Nandasana, A.D., Ray, A.K. and Gupta, S.K. (2003) ‘Dynamic model of an industrial steam
reformer and its use for multiobjective optimization’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry
Nemmani, G.R., Suggala, S.V. and Bhattacharya, P.K. (2009) ‘NSGA-II for multiobjective
optimization of pervaporation process: removal of volatile organics from water’, Industrial
and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp.1543–1550.
Ni, Y., Chen, S. and Kokot, S. (2002) ‘Spectrophotometric determination of metal ions in
electroplating solutions in the presence of EDTA with the aid of multivariate calibration and
artificial neural networks’, Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 463, pp.305–316.
Ni, Y., Huanga, C. and Kokot, S. (2004) ‘Application of multivariate calibration and artificial
neural networks to simultaneous kinetic-spectrophotometric determination of carbamate
pesticides’, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, Vol. 71, pp.177–193.
Ni, Y., Zhang, L., Churchill, J. and Kokot, S. (2007) ‘Application of high performance liquid
chromatography for the profiling of complex chemical mixtures with the aid of
chemometrics’, Talanta, Vol. 72, No. 4, pp.1533–1539.
Norese, M.F. (2006) ‘ELECTRE III as a support for participatory decision-making on the
localization of waste-treatment plants’, Land Use Policy, Vol. 23, pp.76–85.
North, D.W. and Stengel, D.N. (1982) ‘Decision analysis of program choices in magnetic fusion
energy development’, Management Science, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp.276–288.
Oh, P.P., Ray, A.K. and Rangaiah, G.P. (2001) ‘Triple-objective optimization of an industrial
hydrogen plant’, Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan, Vol. 34, No. 11, pp.1341–1355.
Omasa, T., Kishimoto, M., Kawase, M. and Yagi, K. (2004) ‘An attempt at decision making in
tissue engineering: reactor evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP)’,
Biochemical Engineering Journal, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.173–179.
Ong, S.K., Koh, T.H. and Nee, A.Y.C. (2001) ‘Assessing the environmental impact of materials
processing techniques using an analytical hierarchy process method’, Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, Vol. 113, pp.424–431.
Oyama, A. and Liou, M-S. (2002) ‘Multiobjective optimization of rocket engine pumps using
evolutionary algorithm’, Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp.528–535.
Paolucci, M., Sacile, R. and Boccalatte, A. (2002) ‘Allocating crude oil supply to port and refinery
tanks: a simulation-based decision support system’, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 33,
pp.39–54.
Papadopoulos, A.M. and Karagiannidis, A. (2008) ‘Application of the multicriteria analysis method
Electre III for the optimisation of decentralised energy systems’, Omega Journal, Vol. 36,
No. 5, pp.766–776.
Papamichail, K.N. and French, S. (2005) ‘Design and evaluation of an intelligent decision support
system for nuclear emergencies’, Decision Support Systems, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp.84–111.
Papazoglou, I.A. and Christou, M. (1997) ‘A decision support system for emergency response to
nuclear accidents’, Nuclear Technology, Vol. 118, pp.97–123.
Papazoglou, I.A., Nivolianitou, Z., Bonanos, G.S., Duijn, N.J. and Rasmussen, B. (2000)
‘Supporting decision makers in land use planning around chemical sites. Case study:
expansion of an oil refinery’, Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 71, Nos. 1–3, pp.343–373.
Partovi, F.Y. (2007) ‘An analytical model of process choice in the chemical industry’, International
Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 105, No. 1, pp.213–227.
Pati, R.K., Vrat, P. and Kumar, P. (2008) ‘A goal programming model for paper recycling system’,
Omega, Vol. 36, pp.405–417.
Peerenboom, J.P., Buehring, W.A. and Joseph, T.W. (1989) ‘Selecting a portfolio of environmental
programs for a synthetic fuels facility’, Operations Research, Vol. 37, No. 5, pp.689–699.
Peniwati, K. and Brenner, W. (2008) ‘Multi-decisions rating model: establishing rescue policies for
regional drinking water companies (PDAMs) in Indonesia’, European Journal of Operational
Perrot, N., Agioux, L., Ioannou, I., Mauris, G., Corrieu, G. and Trystram, G. (2004) ‘Decision
support system design using the operator skill to control cheese ripening-application of the
fuzzy symbolic approach’, Journal of Food Engineering, Vol. 64, pp.321–333.
Petras, J.C.E. (1997) ‘Ranking the sites for low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste disposal
facilities in Croatia’, International Transaction in Operational Research, Vol. 4, No. 4,
pp.237–249.
Pettersson, F., Chakraborti, N. and Saxén, H. (2007) ‘A genetic algorithms based multi-objective
neural net applied to noisy blast furnace data’, Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 7, pp.387–397.
Pineda-Henson, R., Culaba, A.B. and Mendoza, G.A. (2002) ‘Evaluating environmental
performance of pulp and paper manufacturing using the analytic hierarchy process and
life-cycle assessment’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.15–28.
Poh, K.L. and Ang, B.W. (1999) ‘Transportation fuels and policy for Singapore: an AHP planning
approach’, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 37, pp.507–525.
Pohekar, S.D. and Ramachandran, M. (2004a) ‘Multi-criteria evaluation of cooking energy
alternatives for promoting parabolic solar cooker in India’, Renewable Energy, Vol. 29,
pp.1449–1460.
Pohekar, S.D. and Ramachandran, M. (2004b) ‘Application of multi-criteria decision making to
sustainable energy planning’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 8,
pp.365–381.
Purcell, D.E., Leonard, G.J., O’Shea, M.G. and Kokot, S. (2005) ‘A chemometrics investigation of
sugarcane plant properties based on the molecular composition of epicuticular wax’,
Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, Vol. 76, pp.135–147.
Purcell, D.E., O’Shea, M.G. and Kokot, S. (2007) ‘Role of chemometrics for at-field application of
NIR spectroscopy to predict sugarcane clonal performance’, Chemometrics and Intelligent
Laboratory Systems, Vol. 87, pp.113–124.
Quddus, M.R., Zhang, Y., and Ray, A.K. (2010) ‘Multi-objective optimization in solid oxide fuel
cell for oxidative coupling of methane’, Chemical Engineering Journal, Article in Press.
Raha, S., Majumdar S. and Mitra, K. (2004) ‘Effect of caustic addition in epoxy polymerization
process: a single and multi-objective evolutionary approach’, Journal of Macromolecular
Theory Simulation, Vol. 13, pp.152–161.
Rajesh, J.K., Gupta, S.K., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2000) ‘Multiobjective optimization of
steam reformer performance using genetic algorithm’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Rajesh, J.K., Gupta, S.K., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2001) ‘Multi-objective optimization of
industrial hydrogen plants’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp.999–1010.
Ramanathan, R. (1999) ‘Selection of appropriate greenhouse gas mitigation options’, Global
Environmental Change, Part A9, pp.203–210.
Ramanathan, R. and Ganesh, L.S. (1994) ‘A multi-objective analysis of cooking-energy
alternatives’, Energy, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp.469–478.
Ramzan, N. and Witt, W. (2006) ‘Multi-objective optimization in distillation unit: a case study’,
Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 84, No. 5, pp.604–613.
Randall, P.M, Brown, L., Deschaine, L., Dimarzio, J., Kaiser, G. and Vierow, J. (2004)
‘Application of the analytic hierarchy process to compare alternatives for the long-term
management of surplus mercury’, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 71, No. 1,
pp.35–43.
Rao, R.V. (2008) ‘A decision making methodology for material selection using an improved
compromise ranking method’, Materials and Design, Vol. 29, No. 10, pp.1949–1954.
Ravi, V. and Reddy, P.J. (1999) ‘Ranking of Indian coals via fuzzy multi attribute decision
making’, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 103, No. 3, pp.369–377.
Ravi, G., Gupta, S.K. and Ray, M.B. (2000) ‘Multiobjective optimization of cyclone separators
using genetic algorithm’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 39, No. 11,
pp.4272–4286.
Ravi, G., Gupta, S.K., Viswanathan, S. and Ray, M.B. (2002) ‘Optimization of venturi scrubbers
using genetic algorithm’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 41, No. 12,
pp.2988–3002.
Ren, H., Zhou, W., Nakagami, K., Gao, W. and Wu, Q. (2010) ‘Multi-objective optimization for
the operation of distributed energy systems considering economic and environmental aspects’,
Applied Energy, Vol. 87, No. 12, pp.3642–3651.
Renaud, J., Thibault, J., Lanouette, R., Kiss, L.N., Zaras, K. and Fonteix, C. (2007) ‘Comparison of
two multicriteria decision aid methods: net flow and rough set methods in a high yield pulping
process’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.177, No. 3, pp.1418–1432.
Reniers, G.L.L., Ale, B.J.M., Dullaert, W. and Foubert, B. (2006) ‘Decision support systems for
major accident prevention in the chemical process industry: a developers’ survey’, Journal of
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp.604–620.
Rios-Insua, S., Gallego, E., Jimenez, A. and Mateos, A. (2006) ‘A multi-attribute decision support
system for selecting intervention strategies for radionuclide contaminated freshwater
ecosystems’, Ecological Modelling, Vol. 196, No. 1, pp.195–208.
Ritchie, T.J. (2001) ‘Chemoinformatics: manipulating chemical information to facilitate decision-
making in drug discovery’, Drug Discovery Today, Vol. 6, No. 16, pp.813–814.
Roosen, P., Uhlenbruck, S. and Lucas, K. (2003) ‘Pareto optimization of a combined cycle power
system as a decision support tool for trading off investment vs. operating costs’, International
Journal of Thermal Sciences, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp.553–560.
Roy, B. and Bouyssou, D. (1986) ‘Comparison of two decision-aid models applied to a nuclear
power plant siting example’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 25, No. 2,
pp.200–215.
Rylatt, M., Gadsden, S. and Lomas, K. (2001) ‘GIS-based decision support for solar energy
planning in urban environment’, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 25,
pp.579–603.
Sadiq, R., Khan, F.I. and Veitch, B. (2005) ‘Evaluating offshore technologies for produced water
management using GreenPro-I-A risk-based life cycle analysis for green and clean process
selection and design’, Computers & Chemical Engineering, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp.1023–1039.
Sankararao. B. and Gupta, S.K. (2007a) ‘Multi-objective optimization of an industrial fluidized-bed
catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) using two jumping gene adaptations of simulated annealing’,
Sankararao, B. and Gupta, S.K. (2007b) ‘Multi-objective optimization of pressure swing
adsorbers for air separation’, Industrial Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 46, No. 11,
pp.3751–3765.
Sarkar, D. and Modak, J.M. (2005) ‘Pareto-optimal solutions for multi-objective optimization of
fed-batch bioreactors using nondominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Chemical Engineering
Science, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp.481–492.
Sarkar, D., Rohani, S. and Jutan, A. (2006) ‘Multi-objective optimization of seeded batch
crystallization processes’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 61, No. 16, pp.5282–5295.
Sarkar, D., Rohani, S. and Jutan, A. (2007) ‘Multiobjective optimization of semibatch reactive
crystallization processes’, AICHE Journal, Vol. 53, No. 5, pp.1164–1177.
Saxén, H., Pettersson, F. and Gunturu, K. (2007) ‘Evolving nonlinear time-series models of the hot
metal silicon content in the blast furnace’, Materials and Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 22,
No. 5, pp.577–584.
Schmuhl, J., Hartmann, R., Muller, H. and Hartmann K. (1996) ‘Structural parameter approach and
multicriteria optimization techniques for complex chemical-engineering design’, Computers &
Chemical Engineering, Vol. 20, No. S, pp.327–332.
Schniederjans, M.J., Pantoya, M.L., Hoffman, J.J. and Willauer, D.L. (2009) ‘A multi-objective
modeling approach for energetic material evaluation decisions’, European Journal of
Sendin, J.O.H., Otero-Muras, I., Alonso, A.A. and Banga, J.R. (2006) ‘Improved optimization
methods for the multiobjective design of bioprocesses’, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Settle, S., Goonetilleke, A. and Ayoko, G. (2007) ‘Determination of surrogate indicators for
phosphorus and solids in urban stormwater: application of multivariate data analysis
techniques’, Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, Vol. 182, Nos. 1–4, pp.149–161(13).
Sexton, K., Beck, B.D., Bingham, E., Brain, J.D., DeMarini, D.M., Hertzberg, R.C.,
O’Flaherty, E.J. and Pounds, J.G. (1995) ‘Chemical mixtures from a public health perspective:
the importance of research for informed decision making’, Toxicology, Vol. 105, No. 2,
pp.429–441.
Shanian, A. and Savadogo, O. (2006a) ‘A material selection model based on the concept of
multiple attribute decision making’, Materials and Design, Vol. 27, pp.329–337.
Shanian, A. and Savadogo, O. (2006b) ‘TOPSIS multiple-criteria decision support analysis for
material selection of metallic bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte fuel cell’, Journal of
Power Sources, Vol. 159, pp.1095–1104.
Shanian, A. and Savadogo, O. (2006c) ‘A non-compensatory compromised solution for material
selection of bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) using
ELECTRE IV’, Electrochimica Acta, Vol. 51, pp.5307–5315.
Shelokar, P.S., Jayaraman, V.K. and Kulkarni, B.D. (2003) ‘Multiobjective optimization of
reactor-regenerator system using ant algorithm’, Petroleum Science and Technology, Vol. 21,
Nos. 7–8, pp.1167–1184.
Shi, L. and Yao P.J. (2001) ‘Multi-objective evolutionary algorithms for MILP and MINLP in
process synthesis’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.173–178.
Silva, C.M. and Biscaia, Jr, E.C. (2003) ‘Genetic algorithm development for multi-objective
optimization of batch free-radical polymerization reactors’, Computers & Chemical
Engineering, Vol. 27, Nos. 8–9, pp.1329–1344.
Siskos, J., Lombard, J. and Oudiz, A. (1986) ‘The use of multicriteria outranking methods in the
comparison of control options against a chemical pollutant’, Journal of the Operational
Research Society, Vol. 37, pp.357–371.
Sivakumar, T., Manavalan, R., Muralidharan, C. and Valliappan, K. (2007) ‘Multi-criteria decision
making approach and experimental design as chemometric tools to optimize HPLC separation
of domperidone and pantoprazole’, Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis,
Vol. 43, No. 5, pp.1842–1848.
Skaf, M.A. (1999) ‘Portfolio management in an upstream oil and gas organization’, Interfaces,
Vol. 29, No. 6, pp.84–104.
Smilde, A.K., Knevelman, A. and Coenegracht, P.M.J. (1986) ‘Introduction of multi-criteria
decision making in optimization procedures for high-performance liquid chromatographic
separation’, Journal of Chromatography, Vol. 369, pp. l–10.
Smilde, A.K., Bruins, C.H.P., Doornbos, D.A. and Vink, J. (1987) ‘Optimization of the
reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatographic separation of synthetic estrogenic
and progestogenic steroids using the multi-criteria decision making method’, Journal of
Chromatography, Vol. 410, pp.1–12.
Smith, J.E. and McCardle, K.F. (1999) ‘Options in the real world: lessons learned in evaluating oil
and gas investments’, Operations Research, Vol. 47, No. 1, pp.1–15.
Solimanpur, M., Vrat, P. and Shankar, R. (2004) ‘A multi-objective genetic algorithm approach to
the design of cellular manufacturing systems’, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 42, No. 7, pp.1419–1441.
Solnes, J. (2003) ‘Environmental quality indexing of large industrial development alternatives
using AHP’, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp.283–303.
Song, J., Park, H., Lee, D.Y. and Park, S. (2002) ‘Scheduling of actual size refinery processes
considering environmental impacts with multiobjective optimization’, Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Reseach, Vol. 41, No. 19, pp.4794–4806.
Spengler, T., Geldermann, J., Hähre, S., Sieverdingbeck, A. and Rentz, O. (1998) ‘Development of
a multiple criteria based decision support system for environmental assessment of recycling
measures in the iron and steel making industry’, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 6,
pp.37–52.
Sridhar, J. and Rajendran, C. (1996) ‘Scheduling in flowshop and cellular manufacturing systems
with multiple objectives – a genetic algorithmic approach’, Production Planning & Control,
Vol. 7, No. 4, pp.374–382.
Stan, M. and Reardon, B. (2003) ‘A Bayesian approach to evaluating the uncertainty of
thermodynamic data and phase diagrams’, Calphad-Computer Coupling of Phase Diagrams
and Thermochemistry, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp.319–323.
Sugiyama, H., Hirao, M., Mendivil, R., Fischer, U. and Hungerbuhler, K. (2006) ‘A. hierarchical
activity model of chemical process design based on life cycle assessment’, Process Safety and
Environmental Protection, Vol. 84, No. 1, pp.63–74.
Sun, L. and Lou, H.H. (2008) ‘A strategy for multi-objective optimization under uncertainty in
chemical process design’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 1,
pp.39–42.
Sun, L., Fan, X.S. and Yao, P.J. (2004) ‘Multi-objective fuzzy optimization algorithm
for separation-recycle system’, Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 2,
pp.221 –226.
Tang, L. and Wang, G. (2008) ‘Decision support system for the batching problems of steelmaking
and continuous-casting production’, Omega, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp.976–991.
Tarafder, A., Lee, B.C.S., Ray, A.K. and Rangaiah, G.P. (2005a) ‘Multiobjective optimization of
an industrial ethylene reactor using a nondominated sorting genetic algorithm’, Industrial &
Tarafder, A., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2005b) ‘Multiobjective optimization of an industrial
styrene monomer manufacturing process’, Chemical Engineering Science, Vol. 60,
pp.347–363.
Tarafder, A., Rangaiah, G.P. and Ray, A.K. (2007) ‘A study of finding many desirable solutions in
multiobjective optimization of chemical processes’, Computers and Chemical Engineering,
Vol. 31, No. 10, pp.1257–1271.
Tong, X.Y., Cai, G.B., Zheng, Y.T. and Fang, J. (2006) ‘Optimization of system parameters for
gas-generator engines’, Acta Astronautica, Vol. 59, Nos. 1–5, pp.246–252.
Tzeng, G-H., Lin, C-W. and Opricovic, S. (2005) ‘Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses
for public transportation’, Energy Policy, Vol. 33, No. 11, pp.1373–1383.
Tzeng, G-H., Tsaur, S-H., Laiw, Y-D. and Opricovic, S. (2002) ‘Multicriteria analysis of
environmental quality in Tapei public preferences and improvement strategies’, Journal of
Environmental Management, Vol. 65, pp.109–120.
Vaillancourt, K. and Waaub, J-P. (2004) ‘Equity in international greenhouse gases abatement
scenarios: a multicriteria approach’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 153,
pp.489–505.
Vidal, L-A., Sahin, E., Martelli, N., Berhoune, M. and Bonan, B. (2009) ‘Applying AHP to select
drugs to be produced by anticipation in a chemotherapy compounding unit’, Expert Systems
with Applications, Article in press (doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.067).
Videla, S., Chamy, V.R., Navarette, E. and Lema, J.M. (1990) ‘Design and operation of anaerobic
digesters using multi-objective optimization criteria’, Journal of Chemical Technology and
Biotechnology, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp.223–231.
Vijayasekaran, B., Basha, C.A. and Balasubramanian, N. (2004) ‘Optimization of electrochemical
reactors using genetic algorithms’, Chemical and Biochemical Engineering Quarterly, Vol.
18, No. 4, pp.337–344.
von Winterfeldt, D. (1982) ‘Setting standards for offshore oil discharges: a regulatory decision
analysis’, Operations Research, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp.867–886.
von Winterfeldt, D. and Schweitzer, E. (1998) ‘An assessment of tritium supply alternatives in
support of the US nuclear weapons stockpile’, Interfaces, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.92–112.
Walls, M.R., Morahan, T. and Dyer, J.S. (1995) ‘Decision analysis of exploration opportunities in
the onshore US at Phillips Petroleum Company’, Interfaces, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp.39–56.
Wijtzes, T., Riet, K.V., Veld, J.H.J.H.i. and Zwietering, M.H. (1998) ‘A decision support system
for the prediction of microbial food safety and food quality’, International Journal of Food
Microbiology, Vol. 42, pp.79–90.
Winebrake, J.J. and Creswick, B.P. (2003) ‘The future of hydrogen fueling systems for
transportation – an application of perspective-based scenario analysis using the analytic
hierarchy process’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol.70, No. 4, pp.359–384
(26).
Wolters, W.T.M. and Mareschal, B (1995) ‘Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM
methods’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 81, pp.281–290.
Wu, Y. and Chan, C.W. (2009) ‘A data analysis decision support system for the carbon dioxide
capture process’, Expert Systems With Applications, Vol. 36, No. 6, pp.9949–9960.
Yang, D-L., and Mou, W. (1993) ‘An integrated decision support system in a Chinese chemical
plant’, Interfaces, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp.93–100.
Yee, A.K.Y., Ray, A.K. and Rangaiah, G.P. (2003) ‘Multiobjective optimization of an industrial
styrene reactor’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 27, pp.111–130.
Yu, Q., Zhixian, H. and Zhiguo, Y. (2007) ‘Integrated assessment of environmental and economic
performance of chemical products using analytic hierarchy process approach’, Chinese
Journal of Chemical Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.81–87.
Yuen, C.C., Gupta, A.S.K. and Ray, A.K. (2000) ‘Multi-objective optimization of membrane
separation modules using genetic algorithm’, Journal of Membrane Science, Vol. 176, No. 2,
pp.177–196.
Zeevaert, Th., Bousher, A., Brendler, V., Jensen, P.H. and Nordlinder, S. (2001) ‘Evaluation and
ranking of restoration strategies for radioactively contaminated sites’, Journal of
Environmental Radioactivity, Vol. 56, pp.33–50.
Zeng, G., Jiang, R., Huang, G., Xu, M. and Li, J. (2007) ‘Optimization of wastewater treatment
alternative selection by hierarchy grey relational analysis’, Journal of Environmental
Zhang, Z., Hidajat, K. and Ray, A.K. (2001) ‘Application of simulated countercurrent moving-bed
chromatographic reactor for MTBE synthesis’, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,
Vol. 40, No. 23, pp.5305–5316.
Zhang, Z., Hidajat, K. and Ray, A.K. (2002a) ‘Multiobjective optimization of simulated
countercurrent moving bed chromatographic reactor (SCMCR) for MTBE synthesis’,
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 41, No. 13, pp.3213–3232.
Zhang, Z., Hidajat, K., Ray, A.K. and Morbidelli, M. (2002b) ‘Multiobjective optimization of SMB
and varicol process for chiral separation’, AIChE Journal, Vol. 48, No. 12, pp.2800–2816.
Zhang, Z., Mazzotti, M. and Morbidelli, M. (2003) ‘Multiobjective optimization of simulated
moving bed and Varicol processes using a genetic algorithm’, Journal of Chromatography: A,
Vol. 989, No. 1, pp.95–108.
Zhang, Y., Hidajat, K. and Ray, A.K. (2004) ‘Optimal design and operation of SMB bioreactor:
production of high fructose syrup by isomerization of glucose’, Biochemical Engineering
Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp.111–121.
Zhang, G., Ni, Y., Churchill, J. and Kokot, S. (2006) ‘Authentication of vegetable oils on the
basis of their physico-chemical properties with the aid of chemometrics’, Talanta, Vol. 70,
pp.293–300.
Zhou, F., Gupta, S.K. and Ray, A.K. (2000a) ‘Multiobjective optimization of the continouos
casting process for poly (methyl methacrylate) using adapted genetic algorithm’, Journal of
Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 78, No. 7, pp.1439–1458.
Zhou. Zh., Cheng, S. and Hua, B. (2000b) ‘Supply chain optimization of continuous process
industries with sustainability considerations’, Computers and Chemical Engineering, Vol. 24,
pp.1151–1158.
Zhu, M-S., Wang, B-X. and Xiao, Y-H. (1992) ‘A multi-criteria decision making procedure for the
analysis of an energy system’, Journal of Thermal Science, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.221–225.

A Taxonomy and Review of The Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Literature in Chemical Engineering

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Taxonomy and Review of The Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Literature in Chemical Engineering

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Int. J. Multicriteria Decision Making, Vol. 1, No.

A taxonomy and review of the multiple criteria

Mimi Haryani Hassim

Copyright © 2011 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

1 explain and compare the most common MCDM methods

Keywords: multicriteria decision-making; MCDM; decision support system;

Biographical notes: Mohsen Pirdashti is a Faculty of Engineering in the

Madjid Tavana is a Professor of Management Information Systems and

Mimi Haryani Hassim is a Chemical Engineering Lecturer at Universiti

Majid Behzadian is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Industrial

I.A. Karimi is a Professor in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular

Nowadays, chemical and related industries are getting increasingly involved in

2 Overview of MCDM methods

2.1 Multi-objective decision-making

2.1.1 Multi-objective mathematical programming (MOMP)

2.1.2 Goal programming (GP)

2.1.3 Evolutionary algorithms

2.1.3.1 Genetic algorithm

2.1.3.2 Simulated annealing

The SA is a generic probabilistic meta-heuristic model used to find the global

2.1.3.3 Tabu search

2.1.3.4 Multi-objective differential evolution

2.2 Multi-attribute decision-making

2.2.1 Analytical hierarchy process (AHP)

AHP is a MADM approach that simplifies complex and ill-structured problems by

2.2.2 Preference ranking organisation method for enrichment evaluation

2.2.3 The technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solutions

2.2.4 Multiple attribute utility (value) theory [MAU(V)T]

2.2.5 Elimination and choice translating reality (ELECTRE)

safety decisions Research (2004)

safety PROMETHEE decisions

Figure 2 A classification of the published MCDM-CE papers according to the utilised

In addition to ranking and optimisation, environmental impact assessment was considered

4 Conclusions and future research directions

1 formal adoption of MCDM education in CE curricula

Judd, B.R. and Weissenberger, S. (1982) ‘A systematic approach to nuclear safeguards

You might also like