Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Techniques in Neutrosophic Environment and their Applications to Economic Condition Assessment

Abstract

In economic decision-making, the challenge of evaluating multiple, often conflicting criteria necessitates advanced Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques. Traditional methods can struggle with the inherent uncertainty, ambiguity, and imprecision of real-world data. This paper addresses these challenges by investigating the effectiveness of various MCDM techniques within neutrosophic environments, with a particular focus on the Criteria-wise Alternatives Ranking and Correlation Analysis for Composite Scoring (CARCACS) method. Neutrosophic sets, which incorporate truth, falsity, and indeterminacy, provide a robust framework for addressing the vagueness and inconsistencies found in economic indicators such as GDP growth, employment levels, inflation rates, trade balances, investment activity, and government fiscal policy. This paper conducts a comparative analysis of several MCDM techniques, including N-PROMETHEE II, N-COPRAS, N-GRA, N-ARAS, N-WSM, N-MOORA, N-TOPSIS, and N-WASPAS, assessing their performance using Single-Valued Triangular Neutrosophic Numbers (SVTrNN) in the context of economic condition analysis. The study details the strengths and weaknesses of these methods in managing ambiguous and imprecise data and highlights the neutrosophic CARCACS method's effectiveness in capturing the intricate interactions between criteria and offering a comprehensive evaluation of alternatives. The results reveal the comparative advantages of different MCDM techniques and provide insights into their application in decision-making (DM) under uncertainty. This study contributes to the existing literature by demonstrating how neutrosophic environments can enhance economic DM and by introducing a novel approach for handling economic conditions through the CARCACS method. It aims to assist policymakers and analysts in selecting the most suitable MCDM techniques for complex and uncertain scenarios, leading to more informed and effective decisions. In evaluating MCDM techniques within neutrosophic environments, several sensitivity and comparative challenges arise. The diversity in methods, such as N-PROMETHEE II, N-COPRAS, and N-TOPSIS, introduces variability in handling criteria weightings and alternatives, leading to different results under similar conditions. Sensitivity analysis of the N-CARCACS method also highlights its robustness challenges, particularly how fluctuations in input parameters and criteria weights affect decision outcomes.