International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration ISSN (Print): 2394-5443    ISSN (Online): 2394-7454 Volume-12 Issue-127 June-2025
  1. 4774
    Citations
  2. 2.8
    CiteScore
A hybrid weighting and VIKOR approach for evaluating poverty criteria in KIP scholarship distribution

Komang Aryasa1 and Titik Khawa Abdul Rahman2

Department of ICT,AeU University, Wisma Subang Jaya, Jl. SS 15/4 No.106 Selangor, 47500,Malaysia1
Department of Informatics Engineering,DIPA University, Jl. Perintis Kemerdekaan KM. 9, Makassar,Indonesia2
Corresponding Author : Komang Aryasa

Recieved : 31-October-2024; Revised : 14-June-2025; Accepted : 16-June-2025

Abstract

This study aims to develop a weighting technique for evaluating the poverty criteria of prospective recipients of the Indonesia smart card (KIP) scholarship by applying three weighting methods: the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a subjective approach, entropy as an objective approach, and a hybrid model that combines both. The resulting weights from these methods are then used in the poverty level ranking process using the višekriterijumsko kompromisno rangiranje (VIKOR) method, a multi-criteria decision-making technique based on compromise solutions. The analysis reveals that the hybrid weighting model, with a λ value of 0.8—representing an 80% subjective and 20% objective weighting proportion—achieves a ranking stability level of 61%. These findings indicate that the hybrid approach enhances the accuracy and consistency of ranking prospective KIP scholarship recipients. Sensitivity testing shows that the Hybrid+VIKOR method produced the smallest percentage change at 1.20%, compared to 5.06% for AHP+VIKOR and 53.71% for Entropy+VIKOR. A smaller percentage change signifies greater ranking stability, indicating that the results are less affected by minor variations in the criteria weights.

Keywords

KIP scholarship, Poverty criteria weighting, Analytic hierarchy process (AHP), Entropy, Hybrid weighting model, VIKOR method.

Cite this article

Aryasa K, Rahman TKA. A hybrid weighting and VIKOR approach for evaluating poverty criteria in KIP scholarship distribution. International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration. 2025;12(127):882-906. DOI : 10.19101/IJATEE.2024.111101963

References
[1]
Indonesia. Constitution of the republic of Indonesia. Information Division, Embassy of Indonesia; 1945.
[Google Scholar]
[2]
https://www.bps.go.id/pressrelease/2023/07/17/2016/profil-kemiskinan-di-indonesia-maret-2023.html. Accessed 20 May 2025.
[3]
Ishak R. Clustering tingkat ekonomi mahasiswa calon penerima kartu Indonesia Pintar (KIP) kuliah metode K-means. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Komputer Banthayo Lo Komputer. 2022; 1(2):65-71.
[Google Scholar]
[4]
https://puslapdik.dikdasmen.go.id/47-039-pendaftar-kip-kuliah-kemendikbudristek-lolos-seleksi-snbp-2024/. Accessed 20 May 2025.
[5]
Iskandar A. Sistem pendukung keputusan kelayakan penerima bantuan dana KIP kuliah menggunakan metode ROC-EDAS. Building of Informatics, Technology and Science. 2022; 4(2):856-64.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[6]
Ahmad WD, Bakar AA. Ensemble machine learning model for higher learning scholarship award decisions. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. 2020; 11(5):303-12.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[7]
Odu GO. Weighting methods for multi-criteria decision making technique. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management. 2019; 23(8):1449-57.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[8]
Soba M, Ersoy Y, Tarakcioğlu AA, Erkan B, Şik E. Application of multiple criteria decision‐making methods in assignment place selection. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. 2020; 2020(1):1-13.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[9]
Amorós P. Implementing optimal scholarship assignments via backward induction. Mathematical Social Sciences. 2023; 125:1-10.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[10]
Wandri R, Arta Y, Hanafiah A, Oktaviaani R. Prediction of student scholarship recipients using the K-means algorithm and C4. 5. The Indonesian Journal of Computer Science. 2023; 12(1):74-88.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[11]
Kadja MT, Rumlaklak ND, Djahi BS. Penerapan metode fuzzy C-means dalam penentuan penerima beasiswa program Indonesia pintar (Pip). J-Icon: Jurnal Komputer Dan Informatika. 2023; 11(1):37-43.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[12]
Sałabun W, Urbaniak K. A new coefficient of rankings similarity in decision-making problems. In international conference on computational science 2020 (pp. 632-45). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[13]
Albraheem L, Alawlaqi L. Geospatial analysis of wind energy plant in Saudi Arabia using a GIS-AHP technique. Energy Reports. 2023; 9:5878-98.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[14]
Marenco-porto CA, Nieto-londoño C, Lopera L, Escudero-atehortua A, Giraldo M, Jouhara H. Evaluation of organic rankine cycle alternatives for the cement industry using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methodology and energy-economic-environmental (3E) analysis. Energy. 2023; 281:128304.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[15]
Wijaya ER. Selection of supplier for the evaluation of procurement of special chemical using entropy method and TOPSIS in xyz company. In conference series: materials science and engineering 2020 (pp. 1-12). IOP Publishing.
[Google Scholar]
[16]
Jamali A, Faghih A, Fathi MR, Rostami F. A combined fuzzy multi-criteria decision making framework for evaluation of Islamic banks: a case of MENA region. Fuzzy Optimization and Modeling Journal. 2023; 4(2):62-80.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[17]
Yazo-cabuya EJ, Ibeas A, Herrera-cuartas JA. Integration of sustainability in risk management and operational excellence through the VIKOR method considering comparisons between multi-criteria decision-making methods. Sustainability. 2024; 16(11):1-24.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[18]
Gao Z, Liang RY, Xuan T. VIKOR method for ranking concrete bridge repair projects with target-based criteria. Results in Engineering. 2019; 3:1-9.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[19]
Yang X, Chen Z. A hybrid approach based on monte carlo simulation-VIKOR method for water quality assessment. Ecological Indicators. 2023; 150:1-10.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[20]
Budi MAS, Sugiharto A, Surarso B. The selection model of scholarship recipients using a combination of best worst method, smart and promethee. International Journal of Mathematics and Computer Research. 2025; 13(2):4839-45.
[Crossref]
[21]
Zdravković N, Karakašić M, Kolarević M. Modified promethee approach for solving multi-criteria location problems with complex criteria functions. Tehnički vjesnik. 2020; 27(1):12-9.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[22]
Bera B, Shit PK, Sengupta N, Saha S, Bhattacharjee S. Susceptibility of deforestation hotspots in terai-dooars belt of Himalayan foothills: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS models. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences. 2022; 34(10):8794-806.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[23]
Setiawansyah S. Combination of EDAS method and entropy weighting in the selection of the best customer service. CHAIN: Journal of Computer Technology, Computer Engineering, and Informatics. 2024; 2(3):107-19.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[24]
Pramanik PK, Biswas S, Pal S, Marinković D, Choudhury P. A comparative analysis of multi-criteria decision-making methods for resource selection in mobile crowd computing. Symmetry. 2021; 13(9):1-51.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[25]
Liu Y, Zhang B, Qin J, Zhu Q, Lyu S. Integrated performance assessment of prefabricated component suppliers based on a hybrid method using analytic hierarchy process–entropy weight and cloud model. Buildings. 2024; 14(12):1-24.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[26]
Wang T, Du ZA, Zhang K, Chen K, Xiao F, Ye P. Reliability evaluation of high voltage direct current transmission protection system based on interval analytic hierarchy process and interval entropy method mixed weighting. Energy Reports. 2021; 7:90-9.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
[27]
Marinković G, Ilić Z, Nestorović Ž, Božić M, Bulatović V. Sensitivity of multi-criteria analysis methods in rural land consolidation project ranking. Land. 2024; 13(2):1-14.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar]