Analysis and Comparison of Methods Evaluation Process Multifactor Simple Additive Weighting Method In Tilawatil Musabaqah Quran (MTQ) North Sumatra Province

Analysis and Comparison of Methods Evaluation Process Multifactor Simple Additive Weighting Method In Tilawatil Musabaqah Quran (MTQ) North Sumatra Province


Musabaqah Tilawatil Qur'an (MTQ)
[1] Systematic calculation of the value of the participants in the implementation of Musabaqah Tilawatil Qur'an is the thing to the integrated and accountable results and decisions. To the authors conducted a study to compare two methods of multifactor Evaluation Process (MFEP) and Simple Additive weighting method (SAW) in order to determine which method is more suitable and efficient in implementing the MTQ assessment system.

Multi method Factro Evaluation Process (MFEP)
Multifactor Evaluation Process a decision-making model that uses a collective approach dariproses decision making [2] As for the calculation process steps using MFEP methods, namely: a) Determining factors and weighting factors where the total weighting must be equal to one. b) Load value for each factor affecting the decision of the data to be processed, the value entered in the decision-making process of the data to be processed, the value entered in the decision making process is an objective value. c) Evaluation of weight calculation process is a process between the weight calculation of weight factor and factor evaluation by the sum of all evaluations hasilweight untukmemperoleh total evaluation results. Multi-factor in decision making, decision makers subjectively and intuitively weigh the various factors that have an important influence on alternative them.For influence strategic decisions, it is recommended to use a quantitative approach as MFEP [2].
In the first MFEP -all around the criteria that an important factor in the consideration given weighting (weighting) as appropriate. The same step conducted on alternative -the alternative will be selected, who then dapatdievaluasi related to factors -factors such consideration. Jumlahdarimasing -masingbobotkriteria (w) harussamadengan 1 and mempunyairange nilaievaluasikriteria (e).

Simple Additive weighting method (SAW)
Simple Additive weighting method (SAW) is often also known summation method terbobot.Konsep term basis SAW method is to find a weighted summation of rating performance on each alternative on all attributes. SAW method requires a process of normalizing the decision matrix (X) to a scale that can be compared with all the ratings of existing alternatives. This method is the method most famous and most widely used in dealing with situations of Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM) [3] .MADM itself is a method used to find alternatives alternativeoptimal of a number of specific criteria.
SAW method requires decision makers determining the weights for each attribute. The total score for alternatives is obtained by adding up all the multiplication of rating (which can be compared cross-attribute) and the weight of each attribute. Rating each attribute dimension must be free in the sense that has gone through the process of normalization previous matrix [3].
Step Completion Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) as follows [5]: a) Determining criteria -criteria that will be used as reference in decision making. b) The rating determines the suitability of each alternative on each criterion. c) Make decisions based on criteria matrix (Ci), then normalized matrix based on equations that are tailored to the type attribute (attribute or attributes benefit costs) in order to obtain the normalized matrix R. d) The final results obtained from the ranking process is the summation of the normalized R matrix multiplication with the weight vector in order to obtain the greatest value is selected as the best alternative (Ai) as a solution. formula untukmelakukannormalisasitersebutadalah : Jika j adalah Atribut keuntungan (benefit) Min i X ij X ij jika j adalah atribut biaya cost Where : rij = Normalized performance rating Maxij = Maximum value of each row and column Minij = Minimum value of each row and column Xij = rows and columns of a matrix With rij is the normalized performance rating of alternatives on attribute Ai Cj; i = 1,2, ... m and j = 1,2, ..., n. Preference value for each alternative (Vi) is given as: Where : Vi = Nilaiakhir of alternative wj = The weights have been determined Journal of Computer Networks, Architecture and High Performance Computing is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

rij = Normalization matrix
Vi larger value indicates that the alternative chosen.

Stage Research
In conducting this study the authors conducted several stages for collecting and managing data include: a) Doing Literature The author conducted a study related to the research literature to get more information and references b) Observation and data collection The author conducted a case study, the research by conducting observations and interviews to the practitioner or other authorized bodies of research to get the data needed in the research process. c) Data management The author obtained and selecting the data that is needed for use in research.

Results and Discussion
Analysis and comparison of two methods will result in a decision in the form of advice to the Council of Justice to take the winner Decision MTQ.
In Musabaqah Tilawatil Qur'an there are several criteria including:

Calculation Method MFEP
And the formula for calculating the Total Weight Evaluation is by adding up all the multiplication of Weight Factor with Factor Evaluation and can be described as follows:

Total Weight Evaluation = Σ Weight Factor x Factor Evaluation
Calculation of Total Weight Evaluation will be conducted on each participant MTQ registered and participants who had the highest Total Weight Evaluation will be the champion. Berikutmerupakanhasilperhitunganberdasarkan sample data contained in Tabel3.4 albeit from masingpesrta: The final results of the calculation method for the competitor MTQ MFEP which has the largest value that the winner of the race, the decision can be seen in the table below: