| Issue |
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 685, 2026
International Seminar on Livable Space (IS-LiVaS 2025)
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Article Number | 04003 | |
| Number of page(s) | 11 | |
| Section | Creation Process of Livable-Space | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202668504003 | |
| Published online | 14 January 2026 | |
Comparison of criteria weighting methods (AHP, WSM, EWM, Fuzzy AHP) for assessing student architectural drawings
Doctor of Architecture Program, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning, Trisakti University, Jakarta, Indonesia
* Corresponding author: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract
Determining criterion weights is a crucial stage in the evaluation and decision-making process, especially in the context of architectural drawing assessment. Appropriate weight quality will ensure objectivity and fairness in the assessment. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive comparison between several commonly used weighting methods, namely the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Weighted Sum Model (WSM), Entropy Weight Method (EWM), and Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (Fuzzy AHP) in the context of assessing student architectural drawings. The research data was collected through the results of criteria assessments by five lecturers in the field of architecture on 20 samples of student architectural drawings. This data was then systematically processed using the four weighting methods. The results of the study show significant variations in the weight values produced by each method, which in turn have direct implications for the final assessment results and relative rankings between images. An in-depth analysis of these differences will provide insight into the characteristics, advantages, and limitations of each method in the context of assessments involving subjectivity and objectivity.
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2026
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.

