___

• Abdel-Basset, M., Ding, W., Mohamed, R., & Metawa, N. (2020). An integrated plithogenic MCDM approach for financial performance evaluation of manufacturing ındustries. Risk Management, 22(3), 192-218.
• Asgharpour, M. J. (1998). Multiple criteria decision making. Tehran: Tehran University Press.
• Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P. (1985). A preference ranking organisation method (the promethee method for multiple criteria decision-making). Management Science, 31(6), 647-656.
• Brauers, W.K., & Zavadskas, E.K. (2006). The MOORA method and its application to privatization in a transition economy. Control and Cybernetics, 35(2), 443–468.
• Brauers, W.K.M., & Zavadskas, E.K. (2009). Robustness of the multi-objective MOORA method with a test for the facilities sector. Technological and Economic Development of Economy: Baltic J on Sustainability, 15: 352-375.
• Celen, A. (2014). Comparative analysis of normalization procedures in TOPSIS method: With an application to turkish deposit banking market. Informatica, 25(2), 185-208.
• Chakraborty, S., & Yeh, C. H. (2007). A simulation based comparative study of normalization procedures in multiattribute decision making. 6th WSEAS International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering and Data Bases, 102-109.
• Chakraborty, S., & Yeh, C.H. (2009). A simulation comparison of normalization procedures for TOPSIS. Computing Industrial Engineering, 5(9):1815–1820.
• Chakraborty, S., & Zavadskas, E.K. (2014). Applications of WASPAS method in manufacturing decision making. Informatica, 25 (1): 1–20.
• Chatterjee, P., & Chakraborty, S. (2014). Investigating the effect of normalization norms in flexible manufacturing sytem selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods. Journal of Engineering Science & Technology Review, 7(3): 141-150.
• Delft, A. D., & Nijkamp, P. (1977). Multi-Criteria analysis and regional decision-making. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Germany.
• Durucasu, H., Aytekin, A., Saraç, B., & Orakçı, E (2017). Current application fields of ELECTRE and PROMETHEE: A literature review. Alphanumeric Journal, 5(2), 229-270.
• Ersoy, N. (2020). Selecting the best normalization technique for ROV method: Towards a real life application. Gazi University Journal of Science. 34(2):592-609.
• Farag, M. M. (1997). Materials selection for engineering design. USA: Prentice Hall.
• Ghorabaee, M. K., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2016). A new combinative distance-based assessment (CODAS) method for multi-criteria decision making. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 3(50), 25-44.
• Huang, W. C., & Chen, C. H. (2005). Using the ELECTRE II method to apply and analyze the differentation theory. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 2237-2249.
• Jahan, A., & Edwards, K. L. (2015). A state-of-the-art survey on the influence of normalization techniques in ranking: Improving the materials selection process in engineering design. Materials & Design, 65, 335-342.
• Jahan, A., Bahraminasab, M., & Edwards, K. L. (2012). A target-based normalization technique for materials selection. Materials & Design, 35, 647-654. Jee, D. H., & Kang, K. J. (2000). A method for optimal material selection aided with decision making theory. Materials & Design, 21(3): 199-206.
• Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2018). Simultaneous evaluation of criteria and alternatives (SECA) for multi-criteria decision-making. Informatica, 29(2), 265-280.
• Kosareva, N., Krylovas, A., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2018). Statistical analysis of MCDM data normalization methods using monte carlo approach. The Case of Ternary Estimates Matrix. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 52, 159-175.
• Krishankumar, R., Premaladha, J., Ravichandran, K. S., Sekar, K. R., Manikandan, R., & Gao, X. Z. (2020). A novel extension to VIKOR method under intuitionistic fuzzy context for solving personnel selection problem. Soft Computing, 24(2), 1063-1081.
• Lai, Y.J., & Hwang, C.L. (1994). Fuzzy multiple objective decision making: methods and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Lakshmi, T. M., & Venkatesan, V. P. (2014). A comparison of various normalization in techniques for order performance by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS). International Journal of Computing Algorithm, 3, 882-888.
• Madić, M., & Radovanović, M. (2015). Ranking of some most commonly used non-traditional machining processes using ROV and CRITIC methods. UPB Scientific bulletin, Series D: Mechanical Engineering, 77(2), 193-204.
• Mahmoudi, A., Deng, X., Javed, S. A., & Yuan, J. (2020). Large-scale multiple criteria decision-making with missing values: Project selection through TOPSIS-OPA. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 1-22.
• Mathew, M., Sahu, S., & Upadhyay, A. K. (2017). Effect of normalization techniques in robot selection using weighted aggregated sum product assessment. International journal of innovative research and advanced studies, 4(2):59-63.
• Milani, A. S., Shanian, A., Madoliat, R., & Nemes, J. A. (2005). The effect of normalization norms in multiple attribute decision making models: A case study in gear material selection. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 29(4), 312-318.
• Mufazzal, S., & Muzakkir, S. M. (2018). A new multi-criterion decision making (MCDM) method based on proximity indexed value for minimizing rank reversals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 119, 427-438.
• Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G.H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res,156:445–55.
• Özdağoğlu, A. (2013). The effects of different normalization methods to decision making process in TOPSIS. Ege Academic Review, 13(2), 245-258.
• Pavlicic, D. (2001). Normalization affects the results of MADM methods. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 11(2): 251–265.
• Peldschus, F., Vaigauskas, E., & Zavadskas, E. K. (1983). Technologische entscheidungen bei der berücksichtigung mehrerer ziehle. Bauplanung Bautechnik, 37(4): 173-175.
• Saaty, T. L. (1980).The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Shanian, A., & Savadogo, O. (2006). TOPSIS multiple-criteria decision support analysis for material selection of metallic bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte fuel cell. Journal of Power Sources, 159(2): 1095-1104.
• Shih, H. S., Shyur, H. J., & Lee, E. S. (2007). An Extension of TOPSIS for group decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45(7-8): 801-813.
• Stanujkic, D., Dordevic, B., & Dordevic, M. (2013). Comparative analysis of some prominent MCDM methods: a case of ranking serbian banks. Serbian Journal of Management, 8(2): 213-241.
• Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., & Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare ındustries using a new MCDM method: measurement of alternatives and ranking according to compromise solution (MARCOS). Computers & Industrial Engineering, 140 (106231), 1-15.
• Tabucanon, M.T. (1988). Multiple criteria decision making in industry. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• Tadić, S., Krstić, M., Roso, V., & Brnjac, N. (2020). Dry port terminal location selection by applying the hybrid grey MCDM model. Sustainability, 12(17), 1-24. Triantaphyllou, E. (2000). Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study. USA: Springer.
• Tzeng, G.H., & Huang, J.J. (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, A Chapman&Hall.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2016, April). Normalization techniques for multi-criteria decision making: analytical hierarchy process case study. In doctoral conference on computing, electrical and industrial systems (pp. 261-269). Springer, Cham.
• Vafaei, N., Ribeiro, R. A., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2020). In Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Farhadi, N., Lopes, F., Pereira, H.R. (Eds.), Selecting normalization techniques for the analytical hierarchy process (pp. 43-52). Portugal: DOCEIS.
• Wang, Y. M., & Luo, Y. (2010). Integration of correlations with standard deviations for determining attribute weights in multiple attribute decision making. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 51(1- 2):1-12.
• Wu, H.H. (2002). A comparative study of using grey relational analysis in multiple attribute decision making problems. Quality Engineering, 15(2), 209-217.
• Yazdani, M., Jahan, A., & Zavadskas, E. (2017). Analysis in material selection: ınfluence of normalization tools on copras-g. Economic Computation & Economic Cybernetics Studies & Research, 51(1): 59-74.
• Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2019). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 57(9): 2501-2519.
• Zavadskas, E. K., Kaklauskas, A., & Sarka, V. (1994). The new method of multi-criteria complex proportional assessment of projects. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 1(3): 131-139.
• Zavadskas, E.K., & Turskis, Z. (2008). A new logarithmic normalization method in games theory. Informatica, 19: 303–314.
• Zeng, Q.L., Li, D.D., & Yang ,Y. B. (2013). VIKOR method with enhanced accuracy for multiple criteria decision making in healthcare management. Journal of Medical System, 37: 1-9.
• Zietsman, J., Rilett, L. R., & Kim, S.-J. (2006). Transportation corridor decision-making with multi-attribute utility theory. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 7(2), 254-266.