A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)

Furkan Fahri Altıntaş

doi:10.38088/jise.1776565

A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)

Abstract

This study proposes the Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM), a novel squared difference based approach developed for multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems, enabling the comparative assessment of decision alternatives with respect to both ideal and anti-ideal reference points. In contrast, a substantial portion of conventional MCDM methods prevalent in the literature rely on one-sided distance measures, restrictive metric frameworks, or reference systems that overlook the relative configurations among alternatives. Such methodological constraints create a critical gap, particularly in decision environments where distributional characteristics exert a significant influence. The LDPM method addresses this gap by employing the Lorentzian Distance (LD) metric, distinguished by its high structural sensitivity and strong validity. This metric accentuates subtle differences while minimizing the disproportionate impact of large values, thereby effectively mitigating scale sensitivity issues. In an empirical application using the 2024 Global Innovation Index (GII) dataset, the method was evaluated with Entropy-based criterion weights, and its performance was rigorously examined through sensitivity analysis, comparative evaluation, and simulation scenarios. The results demonstrate that LDPM produces statistically consistent and reliable rankings, exhibiting a high degree of correlation with widely recognized MCDM techniques. Accordingly, LDPM emerges as a robust, flexible, and scientifically rigorous evaluation framework, particularly well-suited for deterministic and uncertainty free decision-making contexts.

Keywords

References

Aktaş, R., Doğanay, M. M., Gökmen, Y., Gazibey, Y., and Türen, U. (2020). Sayısal karar verme yöntemleri. Beta Yayınları: İstanbul.
Anand, A., Agarwal, M., and Aggrawal, D. (2022). Multiple criteria decision-making methods: Applications for managerial discretion. Berlin : Walter De Gruyder GmbH.
Atan, M., and Altan, Ş. (2020). Örnek uygulamalarla çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri. Ankara: Gazi Kitapevi.
Ayçin, E. (2019). Çok kriterli karar verme: bilgisayar uygulamalı çözümler. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
Başdar, C. (2019). Finansal performans ve çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri. Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi.
Beem, J. K., Ehrlich, P., and Easley, K. (1996). Global Lorentzian geometry. New York: MARCEL DEKKER INC.
Belton, V., and Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bernal, A., and Sánchez, M. (2005). Smoothness of time functions and the metric splitting of globally hyperbolic spacetimes. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 257, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-005-1346-1

Bilge, H. Ş., Kerimbekov, Y., & Uğurlu, H. H. (2015). A new classification method by using Lorentzian distance metric [Conference presentation]. International Symposium on Innovations in Intelligent Systems and Applications (INISTA 2015), Madrid, Spain, 296–301. doi.org/10.1109/inista.2015.7276764
Bridgman, P. W. (1922). Dimensional analysis. London: Yale University Press.
Churchman, C. W., and Ackoff, R. L. (1954). An approximate measure of value. Operations research society of America, 2, 172-187.
Çelikbilek, Y., and Özdemir, M. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri-açıklamalı ve karşılaştırmalı sağlık bilimleri uygulamaları ile. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Demir, G. (2021). Vakif üniversitelerinde akademik performans analizi: Critic-Wedba bütünleşik model uygulaması. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1(1), 39-50.
Demir, G., and Arslan, R. (2022). Sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision-making problems. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(3), 1025-1056.https://doi.org/10.26745/ahbvuibfd.1103531
Demir, G., and Kartal, M. (2020). Güncel çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri. Ankara: Akademisyen Yayınevi.
Demirci, A. (2020). Sağlık hizmetleri yönetiminde: çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri. Ankara: Gazi Kitapevi.
Dinçer, S. E. (2019). Çok kriterli karar alma. Ankara: Gece Akademi.
Dua, T. V. (2024). PSI-SAW and PSI-MARCOS hybrid mcdm. Engineering, Technology and Applied Science Research, 14(4), 15963-15968. https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.7992
Ecer, F. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Ghosh, S., Raut, R. D., Cheikhrouhou, N., Bhowmik, C., and Ray, A. (2025). Paving the Pathway: An entropy-based combined compromise solution approach to facilitate the ındian plastic ındustry's transition toward a circular economy. Busİness Strategy and The Environment, 5(34), 5515-5543. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.4253
Gigovic, L., Pamucar, D., Bajic, Z., and Milicevic, M. (2016). The combination of expert judgment and gis-mairca analysis for the selection of sites for ammunition depots. Sustainability, 8(4), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040372
Goswami, S. S., Behera, D. K., and Mitra, S. (2020). A comprehensive study of weighted product model for selecting the best laptop model available in the market. Brazilian Journal of Operations and Production Management, 17(2), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2020.017
Ha, L. D. (2023). Selection of suitable data normalization method to combine with the cradis method for making multi-criteria decision. Applied Engineering Letters, 8(1), 24-35. https://doi.org/10.18485/aeletters.2023.8.1.4
Hwang, C. L., and Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ishizaka, A., and Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-criteria decision analysis: Methods and software. West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
Kaliszewski, I., Miroforidis, J., and Podkopaev, D. (2016). Multiple criteria decision making by multiobjective optimization. Berlin: Springer Cham.
Kara, K., Yalçın, G. C., Kaygısız, E. G., and Edinsel, S. (2024). Assessing the academic performance of Turkish universities in 2023: A MEREC-WEDBA Hybrid Methodology Approach. Journal of Operations Intelligence, 2(1), 52-72. https://doi.org/10.31181/jopi21202422
Kaya, İ., and Karaşan, A. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme. İzmit: Umuttepe Yayınları.
Kaymaz, Ç. K., Birinci, S., and Kızılkan, Y. (2020). Ordu ili turizm merkezlerinin çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerine göre analizi. İstanbul: Kriter Yayınevi.
Keleş, N. (2023). Uygulamalarla klasik ve güncel karar verme yöntemleri. Ankara: Atlas Akademik Basım Yayın Dağıtım.
Kerimbekov, Y., Bilge, H. Ş., and Uğurlu, H. H. (2016). The use of Lorentzian distance metric in classification problems. Pattern Recognition Letters, 84, 170-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2016.09.006
Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Zavadskas, K., Turskis, Z., and 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), 26-44.
Keshavarz-Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., and Antucheviciene, J. (2021). Determination of objective weights using a new method based on the removal effects of criteria (MEREC). Symmetry, 13(525), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym13040525
Kulkarni, A. J. (2022). Multiple criteria decision making: techniques, analysis and applications. Singapore: Springer Nature.
Kunzinger, M., and Sämann, C. (2018). Annals of global analysis and geometry. Lorentzian length spaces, 54, 399–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10455-018-9633-1
Levy, A., Shalom, B. R., and Chalamish, M. (2024). A guide to similarity measures. arXiv, 2408.0770, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv:2408.0770
Lopez, L. M., Ishizaka, A., and Qin, J. (2023). Multi criteria decision making sorting methods: Applications to real world. Cambridge-Massachusetts: Academic Press.
Merigó, J. M. (2009). On the use of the owa operator in the weighted. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, 1, 1-7.
Minguzzi, E. (2008). Characterization of some causality conditions through the continuity of the Lorentzian distance. arXiv, 0810.1879v3, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.488550/arXiv0810.1879v3
Minguzzi, E., and Sanchez, M. (2008). The causal hierarchy of spacetimes. arXiv, 1-63. https://doi.org/10.48850/gr-qc/0609119
Munier, N. (2024). Strategic approach in multi criteria decision making. Gewerbestrasse: Springer International Publishing AG.
O’neill, B. (1983). Semi-riemannian geometry with applications to relativity. London: Academic Press.
Özbek, A. (2019). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ve excel ile problem çözümü kavram-teori-uygulama. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Öztel, A., and Alp, İ. (2020). Çok kriterli karar verme seçiminde yeni bir yaklaşım. İstanbul: Kriter Yayıncılık.
Paksoy, S. (2017). Çok kriterli karar vermede güncel yaklaşımlar. Adana: Karahan Kitapevi.
Puška, A., Božanić, D., Mastilo, Z., and Pamučar, D. (2023). A model based on MEREC-CRADIS objective decision-making methods and the application of double normalization: A case study of the selection of electric cars. Research Square, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2092146/v1
Puška, A., Nedeljkovic, M., Prodanovic, R., Vladisavljevic, R., and Suzic, R. (2022). Market assessment of pear varieties in serbia using fuzzy. CRADIS and CRITIC methods, 12(139), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12020139
R. L. Keeney ve H. Raiffa, Decision making with multiple objectives preferences and value tradeoffs, New York: Wiley, 1976.
Rao, R. V., and Singh, D. (2012). Weighted euclidean distance based approach as a multiple attribute decision making method. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 3, 365–382. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijiec.2012.01.003
Rao, R. V., Singh, D., Bleicher, F., and Dorn, C. (2012). Weighted Euclidean distance-based approach as a multiple attribute decision making method for manufacturing situations. International Journal of Multicriteria Decision Making, 2(3), 225-240. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMCDM.2012.047845
Roshanravan, B., Kreuzer, O. P., and Buckingham, A. (2025). BWM-MARCOS: A new hybrid MCDM approach for mineral potential modelling. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 269, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2024.107639
Rosyidi, C. N. (2024). Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Rajori: Deeppublisch Digital.
Sachs, R. K., and Wu, H.-H. (1977). General Relativity for Mathematicians. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Sotoudeh-Anvari, A., Sadjadi, S. J., Molana, S. M., and Sadi-Nezhad, S. (2018). A new mcdm-based approach using bwm and saw for optimal search model. Decision Science Letters, 7, 395–404. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2018.2.001
Stanujkic, D., Popovic, G., Karabasevic, D., Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I., and Ulutaş, A. (2023). An Integrated Simple Weighted Sum Product Method-WISP. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(5), 1933-1944. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2021.3075783
Stević, Ž., Pamučar, D., Puška, A., and Chatterjee, P. (2020). Sustainable Supplier Selection in Healthcare Industries Using A New MCDM Method: Measurement of Alternatives and Ranking According to Compromise Solution (MARCOS). Computers and Industrial Engineering, 140, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2019.106231
Şahin, M. (2022). Güncel ve uygulamalı çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri. Ankara: Nobel.
Taşcı, M. Z. (2023). MEREC ve cradis yöntemlerini içeren entegre bir çvkk. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 25(1), 35-53. https://doi.org/10.31671/doujournal.1294336
Tepe, S. (2021). Örnek uygulamalarla çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri. Ankara: Akademisyen kitapevi.
Thakkar, J. J. (2021). Multi criteria decision making. Singapore: Springer Singapore.
Thanh, N. V. (2020). Multi-Criteria decision making (mcdm) model for supplier evaluation and selection in the supply chain management. Chișinău: Eliva Press.
Todeschini, R., Ballabio, D., Consonni, V., Mauri, A., and Pavan, M. (2007). CAIMAN (Classification And Influence Matrix Analysis): A new approach to the classification based on leverage-scaled functions. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 87(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2005.11.001
TradingView. (2023, February 9). Machine learning lorentzian classification. https://www.tradingview.com/script/WhBzgfDu-Machine-Learning-Lorentzian-Classification
Triantaphyllou, E. (2010). Multi-criteria decision making methods: A comparative study. New York: Springer.
Trung, D. D., and Nhu-Tung, N. (2022). Applying cocoso, mabac, mairca, eamr, topsis and weight determination methods for multi-criteria decision making in hole turning process. Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 15-40. https://doi.org/10.2478/scjme-2022-0014
Uludağ, A. S., and Doğan, H. (2021). Üretim yönetiminde çok kriterli karar verme. Ankara: Nobel.
Ulutaş, A., and Topal, A. (2020). Bütünleştirilmiş çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinin üretim sektörü uygulamaları. Ankara: Akademisyen Kitapevi.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO. (2024). Global innovation index 2024: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship. Geneva: WIPO.
Yager, R. R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multi criteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18, 183-190. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.87068
Yakowitz, D. S., Lane, A. J., and Szidarovszky, F. (1993). Multi-attribute decision making: dominance with respect to an importance order of the attributes. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 54(2-3) 167181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0096-3003(93)90057-L
Yazdani, M., Zarate, P., Zavadskas, E. K., and Turskis, Z. (2018). A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Management Decision, 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-05-2017-0458
Yıldırım, B. F., and Çiftci, H. N. (2021). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri ile finansal performans analizi ve tahmin modeli: Çimento sektöründe bir uygulama. İstanbul: Türkmen Kitapevi.
Zavadskas, E. K., Antucheviciene, J., and Chatterjee, P. (2019). Multiple criteria decision making (mcdm) techniques for business processes ınformation management. Basel: Mdpi AG Press.
Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., Antucheviciene, J., and Zakarevičius, A. (2012). Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. Elektronika ir Elektrotechnika, 122(6), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.eee.122.6.1810
Zeleny, M. (1984). McDm: Past decade and future trends decision making-A seires of monographs. Stamford: JAI Press.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Industrial Engineering

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Furkan Fahri Altıntaş ^*
0000-0002-0161-5862
Türkiye

Publication Date

August 17, 2026

Submission Date

September 2, 2025

Acceptance Date

March 5, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 10 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.38088/jise.1776565

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA26PR83UR

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Altıntaş, F. F. (2026). A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM). Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering, 10(2), 294-320. https://doi.org/10.38088/jise.1776565

AMA

1.Altıntaş FF. A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM). JISE. 2026;10(2):294-320. doi:10.38088/jise.1776565

Chicago

Altıntaş, Furkan Fahri. 2026. “A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)”. Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering 10 (2): 294-320. https://doi.org/10.38088/jise.1776565.

EndNote

Altıntaş FF (August 1, 2026) A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM). Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering 10 2 294–320.

IEEE

[1]F. F. Altıntaş, “A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)”, JISE, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 294–320, Aug. 2026, doi: 10.38088/jise.1776565.

ISNAD

Altıntaş, Furkan Fahri. “A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)”. Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering 10/2 (August 1, 2026): 294-320. https://doi.org/10.38088/jise.1776565.

JAMA

1.Altıntaş FF. A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM). JISE. 2026;10:294–320.

MLA

Altıntaş, Furkan Fahri. “A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM)”. Journal of Innovative Science and Engineering, vol. 10, no. 2, Aug. 2026, pp. 294-20, doi:10.38088/jise.1776565.

Vancouver

1.Furkan Fahri Altıntaş. A Novel Method for Performance Evaluation of Alternatives: Lorentzian Distance Performance Measurement (LDPM). JISE. 2026 Aug. 1;10(2):294-320. doi:10.38088/jise.1776565