Abstract

The paper introduces a multi-criteria assessment system that can be used for sensory analysis by fuzzy-Eckenrode and fuzzy-TOPSIS methods. Respondents evaluated the sensory characteristics of Cucumis melo (L.), which included aroma, colour, taste, texture, and overall acceptance, after six days of storage. The product was stored under three different temperature conditions: 10°C (B1), 14°C (B2), and room temperature (27–30°C) (B3). The product was also stored at three types of packaging: unpackaged stem (A1), packaged fruit with one layer of banana stem (A2), and packaged fruit with two layers of banana stem (A3). The best result was demonstrated by the Cucumis melo that was stored at 14°C and packaged in a two-layered banana stem (A3B2). Both fuzzy-Eckenrode and fuzzy-TOPSIS method provided an easy, fast, and unambiguous calculation of multi-criteria sensory assessment.

Keywords

Banana stem, hedonic scale, Cucumis melo (L.), sensory assessment, TOPSIS, Eckenrode

REFERENCES

1. Lukman AJ. Pembuatan pulp dari pelepah pisang dengan alat digester [Making of pulp from Musa paradiciasa with a digester]. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro; 2011. 34 p. (In Indonesian).
2. Wang L-X. A course in Fuzzy System Control. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1997. 448 p.
3. Kusumadewi S, Purnomo H. Aplikasi Logika Fuzzy, Untuk Pendukung Keputusan [Fuzzy Logics Application for Decision Making]. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu; 2010. (In Indonesian).
4. Fadhil R, Maarif MS, Bantacut T, Hermawan A. Sistem Penunjang Keputusan Multi Kriteria Untuk Pengembangan Agroindustri Kopi Gayo Menggunakan Pendekatan Fuzzy-Eckenrode dan Fuzzy-TOPSIS [A Multi-Criteria Decision Support System for the Development of Gayo Coffee Agroindustry by Using Fuzzy-Eckenrode and Fuzzy-TOPSIS Approaches]. Jurnal Teknologi Industri Pertanian [Journal of Agroindustrial Technology]. 2017;27(4):103–113. DOI: http://doi.org/10.24961/j.tek.ind.pert.2017.27.1.103. (In Indonesian).
5. Rahmawati S, Kartika L, Syamsun M, Sayekti A. Strategi Peningkatan Daya Saing UKM Sektor Sapi Perah di Indonesia [The Strategy to Increase the Competitiveness of SMEs in the Dairy Cattle Sector in Indonesia]. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen [Journal of Apllication Management]. 2016;14(4):735–746. DOI: http://doi.org/10.18202/jam23026332.14.4.14. (In Indonesian).
6. Rijai L. Penentuan kriteria ilmiah potensi tumbuhan obat unggulan [Determination of the scientific criteria of potential superior medicinal plants]. Journal of Tropical Pharmacy and Chemistry. 2011;1(2):125–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25026/jtpc.v1i2.20. (In Indonesian).
7. Kao C. Weight determination for consistently ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis. Applied Mathematical Modelling. 2010;34(7):1779–1787. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2009.09.022.
8. Thompson RL, Iacovou CL, Shirland LE. A Comparison of Evaluation Techniques for Decision Analysis Involving Large Attribute Sets. Journal of Applied Business Research. 2006;22(2):25–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v22i2.1432.
9. Dadelo S, Turskis Z, Zavadskas EK, Dadeliene R. Multiple Criteria assessment of elite security personal on the basis of ARAS and expert methods. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research. 2012;46(4):65–87.
10. Eckenrode RT. Weighting Multiple Criteria. Management Science. 1965;12(3):180–192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.12.3.180.
11. Salam AR. Analisis Penentuan Pelabuhan Impor Produk Hortikultura: Aplikasi Metode Eckenrode [Analysis of Determination of Port Criteria for Imported Horticultural Products: Application of Eckenrode Method]. Buletin Ilmiah Litbang Perdagangan [Scientific Bulletin of Commerce R&D]. 2014;8(1):1–24. DOI: http://doi.org/10.30908/bilp.v8i1.83. (In Indonesian).
12. Maarif MS, Tanjung H. Teknik-Teknik Kuantitatif untuk Manajemen [Quantitative techniques for management]. Jakarta: Gasindo; 2003. 188 p. (In Indonesian).
13. Yoon K. System Selection by Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Cand. eng. sci. diss. Kansas: Kansas State University; 1980. 238 p.
14. Yoon K., Hwang CL. TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) – A Multiple Attribute Decision Making. 1980.
15. Hwang CL, Yoon K. Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 1981. 269 p. DOI: htts://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9.
16. Kumar K, Garg H. TOPSIS method based on the connection number of set pair analysis under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy set environment. Computational and Applied Mathematics. 2018;37(2):1319–1329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-016-0402-0.
17. Han H, Trimi S. A fuzzy TOPSIS method for performance evaluation of reverse logistics in social commerce platforms. Expert Systems with Applications. 2018;103:133–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.03.003.
18. Tyagi SK. Making selection using multiple attribute decision-making with intuitionistic fuzzy sets. International Journal of Systems Science: Operations and Logistics. 2018;5(2):149–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23302674.2016.1244300.
19. Estrella FJ, Onar SC, Rodriguez RM, Oztaysi B, Martinez L, Kahraman C. Selecting firms in University technoparks: A hesitant linguistic fuzzy TOPSIS model for heterogeneous contexts. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems.2017;33(2):1155–1172. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-16727.
20. Roszkowska E, Kacprzak D. The fuzzy saw and fuzzy TOPSIS procedures based on ordered fuzzy numbers. Information Sciences. 2016;369:564–584. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2016.07.044.
21. Selim H, Yunusoglu MG, Balaman SY. A Dynamic Maintenance Planning Framework Based on Fuzzy TOPSIS and FMEA: Application in an International Food Company. Quality and Reliability Engineering International. 2016;32(3):795–804. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1791.
22. Ningrum M, Sutarman S, Sitepu R. Aplikasi Metode TOPSIS Fuzzy dalam Menentukan Prioritas Kawasan Perumahan di Kecamatan Percut Sei Tuan [Application of fuzzy TOPSIS method in determining the priority of housing areas in Percut Sei Tuan district]. Saintia Matematika. 2013;1(1):101–115. (In Indonesian).
23. Fadhil R, Maarif MS, Bantacut T, Hermawan A. Perbandingan teknik pengambilan keputusan multi-kriteria antara metode Eckenrode dengan metode fuzzy Eckenrode pada kinerja agroindustri (A comparison of multi-criteria decison making technique between Eckenrode and fuzzy-Eckenrode methods on agroindustry performance). Jurnal Manajemen & Agribisnis [Journal of Management & Agribusiness]. 2017;14(2):109–117. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17358/jma.14.2.109. (In Indonesia).
24. Rouyendegh BD, Saputro TE. Supplier selection using integrated fuzzy TOPSIS and MCGP: a case study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014;116:3957–3970. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.874.