A Hybrid BWM-GRA-PROMETHEE Framework for Ranking Universities Based on Scientometric Indicators

Abstract

University rankings based on scientometric indicators frequently rely on compensatory aggregation models that allow extreme values to dominate the evaluation, while also remaining sensitive to outliers and unstable weighting procedures. These issues reduce the reliability and interpretability of the resulting rankings. This study proposes a hybrid BWM–GRA–PROMETHEE (BGP) framework that combines judgement-based weighting Best-Worst Method (BWM), outlier-resistant normalization Grey Relational Analysis (GRA), and a non-compensatory outranking method Preference Ranking Organization Methods for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE II). The framework is applied to an expert-validated set of scientometric indicators to generate more stable and behaviorally grounded rankings. The results show that the proposed method maintains stability under weight and threshold variations and preserves ranking consistency even under outlier-contaminated scenarios. Comparative experiments further demonstrate that BGP is more robust than Additive Ratio Assesment (ARAS), Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison (MABAC), and The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), achieving the highest Spearman. This study contributes a unified evaluation framework that jointly addresses three major methodological challenges in scientometric ranking, outlier sensitivity, compensatory effects, and instability from data-dependent weighting. By resolving these issues within a single integrated model, the proposed BGP approach offers a more reliable and methodologically rigorous foundation for researchers and policymakers seeking to evaluate and enhance research performance.