• Energy Research

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 27.04.2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1024489 A social multi-criteria evaluation framework for solving a real-case problem of selecting a wind farm location in the regions of Urgell and Conca de Barberá in Catalonia (northeast of Spain) is studied. This paper applies a qualitative multi-criteria decision analysis approach based on linguistic labels assessment able to address uncertainty and deal with different levels of precision. This method is based on qualitative reasoning as an artificial intelligence technique for assessing and ranking multi-attribute alternatives with linguistic labels in order to handle uncertainty. This method is suitable for problems in the social framework such as energy planning which require the construction of a dialogue process among many social actors with high level of complexity and uncertainty. The method is compared with an existing approach, which has been applied previously in the wind farm location problem. This approach, consisting of an outranking method, is based on Condorcet's original method. The results obtained by both approaches are analysed and their performance in the selection of the wind farm location is compared in aggregation procedures. Although results show that both methods conduct to similar alternatives rankings, the study highlights both their advantages and drawbacks. Peer Reviewed

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence on 27.04.2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/0952813X.2015.1024489 A social multi-criteria evaluation framework for solving a real-case problem of selecting a wind farm location in the regions of Urgell and Conca de Barberá in Catalonia (northeast of Spain) is studied. This paper applies a qualitative multi-criteria decision analysis approach based on linguistic labels assessment able to address uncertainty and deal with different levels of precision. This method is based on qualitative reasoning as an artificial intelligence technique for assessing and ranking multi-attribute alternatives with linguistic labels in order to handle uncertainty. This method is suitable for problems in the social framework such as energy planning which require the construction of a dialogue process among many social actors with high level of complexity and uncertainty. The method is compared with an existing approach, which has been applied previously in the wind farm location problem. This approach, consisting of an outranking method, is based on Condorcet's original method. The results obtained by both approaches are analysed and their performance in the selection of the wind farm location is compared in aggregation procedures. Although results show that both methods conduct to similar alternatives rankings, the study highlights both their advantages and drawbacks. Peer Reviewed

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13762-016-0982-7 Multi-criteria decision-making methods support decision makers in all stages of the decision-making process by providing useful data. However, criteria are not always certain as uncertainty is a feature of the real world. MCDM methods under uncertainty and fuzzy systems are accepted as suitable techniques in conflicting problems that cannot be represented by numerical values, in particular in energy analysis and planning. In this paper, a modified TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision-making with qualitative linguistic labels is proposed. This method addresses uncertainty considering different levels of precision. Each decision maker’s judgment on the performance of alternatives with respect to each criterion is expressed by qualitative linguistic labels. The new method takes into account linguistic data provided by the decision makers without any previous aggregation. Decision maker judgments are incorporated into the proposed method to generate a complete ranking of alternatives. An application in energy planning is presented as an illustrative case example in which energy policy alternatives are ranked. Seven energy alternatives under nine criteria were evaluated according to the opinion of three environmental and energy experts. The weights of the criteria are determined by fuzzy AHP, and the alternatives are ranked using qualitative TOPSIS. The proposed approach is compared with a modified fuzzy TOPSIS method, showing the advantages of the proposed approach when dealing with linguistic assessments to model uncertainty and imprecision. Although the new approach requires less cognitive effort to decision makers, it yields similar results. Peer Reviewed

The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13762-016-0982-7 Multi-criteria decision-making methods support decision makers in all stages of the decision-making process by providing useful data. However, criteria are not always certain as uncertainty is a feature of the real world. MCDM methods under uncertainty and fuzzy systems are accepted as suitable techniques in conflicting problems that cannot be represented by numerical values, in particular in energy analysis and planning. In this paper, a modified TOPSIS method for multi-criteria group decision-making with qualitative linguistic labels is proposed. This method addresses uncertainty considering different levels of precision. Each decision maker’s judgment on the performance of alternatives with respect to each criterion is expressed by qualitative linguistic labels. The new method takes into account linguistic data provided by the decision makers without any previous aggregation. Decision maker judgments are incorporated into the proposed method to generate a complete ranking of alternatives. An application in energy planning is presented as an illustrative case example in which energy policy alternatives are ranked. Seven energy alternatives under nine criteria were evaluated according to the opinion of three environmental and energy experts. The weights of the criteria are determined by fuzzy AHP, and the alternatives are ranked using qualitative TOPSIS. The proposed approach is compared with a modified fuzzy TOPSIS method, showing the advantages of the proposed approach when dealing with linguistic assessments to model uncertainty and imprecision. Although the new approach requires less cognitive effort to decision makers, it yields similar results. Peer Reviewed