Table 1.
Description of used acronyms.
Table 2.
The CI values for the comparisons using BWM.
Fig 1.
Proposed hybrid MCDM methodology.
BWM: Best-worst method. EDAS: Evaluation based on distance from average solution.
Table 3.
Best to others and others to worst criteria comparisons.
Table 4.
Evaluation of alternatives with respect to criteria [20].
Table 5.
Values of SP, NSP, SN, NSN, AS and ranking for the EDAS method.
Table 6.
Comparison of TOPSIS, VIKOR and DBA methods with proposed method.
Fig 2.
Comparison of normalized score of EDAS and TOPSIS methods.
Fig 3.
Comparison of normalized score of DBA and VIKOR methods.
Table 7.
Different scenarios for criteria weights.
Fig 4.
Sensitivity analysis of the criteria C1.
Fig 5.
Sensitivity analysis of the criteria C2.
Fig 6.
Sensitivity analysis of the criteria C3.
Fig 7.
Sensitivity analysis of the criteria C4.
Table 8.
Ranking of robots with respect to different scenarios defined in Table 7.
Fig 8.
Sensitivity analysis diagram of the EDAS results.
Fig 9.
Sensitivity analysis of robots ranking.