Testing the reliability of deterministic multi-criteria decision-making methods using building performance simulation

Highlights: • We compare four deterministic decision protocols using building performance simulation. • Three of four methods yield similar results, showing agreement on the top design alternatives. • Apart from TOPSIS, the methods provide confidence in the final decision. • We further tested the sensitivity based on changes in subjective preferences. • Four "what-if" scenarios indicate that TOPSIS is most sensitive to these changes. -- Abstract: The design of a building is a decision problem with multiple stakeholders and several often conflicting criteria. Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) methods are capable of handling decision problems with the abovementioned specific features. This paper focuses on the application and comparison of some of the most well-known and widely applied MCDM methods; namely AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE III, and PROMETHEE II. For this purpose, a framework that incorporates the decision-makers' preferences and the use of dynamic simulation of the potential building forms is developed and applied to a real-life case study. This procedure provides a holistic approach through which the design team arrives at a more appropriate decision. The examined methods yield similar results, showing broad agreement on the top ten alternatives, amongst which the decision-makers can decide. In particular, the majority of the examined methods (all except TOPSIS) concluded with the same optimal solution, a situation that provides confidence in the final decision. Furthermore, an investigation of four "what-if" scenarios indicates that TOPSIS is the most sensitive method to the examined changes in the subjective preferences.