
Nowadays, having the greatest product is something that everyone aspires to. Choosing the greatest product has become more difficult in the present day, since numerous products seem to have excellent specs as well. Thus, is generally regarded as an MCDM issue, where the best material is picked based on a given set of competing criteria, and this plays a vital part in its correct functioning. The designers of these MCDM challenges don't typically know how many criteria they should use to arrive at the best possible decision. It's best to limit the number of criteria to seven plus or minus two and make sure they're not interdependent. The Full Consistency Method (FUCOM) is a novel multi-criteria problem-solving approach presented in this research. In the model, two sets of constraints are required to meet the weight coefficients' optimum values. On the basis of pairwise comparisons of criteria, the model was validated by comparing it to two other subjective models (SAW and WASPAS).
Full Consistency Method (FUCOM); Simple Additive Weighting (SAW); Weighted Aggregate Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS);
Full Consistency Method (FUCOM); Simple Additive Weighting (SAW); Weighted Aggregate Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS);
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
