Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization
Abstract This research paper aims at developing a triplex multi-criteria decision model to achieve an optimum allocation of resources to a portfolio of oilfields based on a number of criteria that pertain to the oilfields’ technical and contextual characteristics. It also offers an approach for vali...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2017-04-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13202-017-0344-0 |
| _version_ | 1797991945239265280 |
|---|---|
| author | Mohammed Qaradaghi Jonathan P. Deason |
| author_facet | Mohammed Qaradaghi Jonathan P. Deason |
| author_sort | Mohammed Qaradaghi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract This research paper aims at developing a triplex multi-criteria decision model to achieve an optimum allocation of resources to a portfolio of oilfields based on a number of criteria that pertain to the oilfields’ technical and contextual characteristics. It also offers an approach for validating the prioritization results generated by the methods used through a two-dimensional test that compares the internal and external prioritization stability of three multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods against a conventional Intuitive approach. The MCDM methods used include Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enriched Evaluation (PROMETHEE), and Technique of Order Preference Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). The internal and external consistency testing results are outlined in nine possible scenarios through which a conclusion is derived confirming the competitive advantage of MCDM methods. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:00:16Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-207596fec44f4c6abe145e96e1db6ec0 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2190-0558 2190-0566 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T09:00:16Z |
| publishDate | 2017-04-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology |
| spelling | doaj.art-207596fec44f4c6abe145e96e1db6ec02022-12-22T04:32:48ZengSpringerOpenJournal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology2190-05582190-05662017-04-018261764010.1007/s13202-017-0344-0Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritizationMohammed Qaradaghi0Jonathan P. Deason1George Washington UniversityGeorge Washington UniversityAbstract This research paper aims at developing a triplex multi-criteria decision model to achieve an optimum allocation of resources to a portfolio of oilfields based on a number of criteria that pertain to the oilfields’ technical and contextual characteristics. It also offers an approach for validating the prioritization results generated by the methods used through a two-dimensional test that compares the internal and external prioritization stability of three multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods against a conventional Intuitive approach. The MCDM methods used include Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Preference Ranking Organization METHod for Enriched Evaluation (PROMETHEE), and Technique of Order Preference Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). The internal and external consistency testing results are outlined in nine possible scenarios through which a conclusion is derived confirming the competitive advantage of MCDM methods.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13202-017-0344-0Decision analysisEnergy managementMCDMOil and gasPortfolio optimization |
| spellingShingle | Mohammed Qaradaghi Jonathan P. Deason Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology Decision analysis Energy management MCDM Oil and gas Portfolio optimization |
| title | Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| title_full | Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| title_fullStr | Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| title_full_unstemmed | Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| title_short | Analysis of MCDM methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| title_sort | analysis of mcdm methods output coherence in oil and gas portfolio prioritization |
| topic | Decision analysis Energy management MCDM Oil and gas Portfolio optimization |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13202-017-0344-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mohammedqaradaghi analysisofmcdmmethodsoutputcoherenceinoilandgasportfolioprioritization AT jonathanpdeason analysisofmcdmmethodsoutputcoherenceinoilandgasportfolioprioritization |