Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Bulletin of Computer Science Research
Jahraini, Ratu Adnin
Unknown Affiliation
Computer Science & IT

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan Content Creator TikTok Terbaik Menggunakan Metode Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) dengan Pembobotan Rank Order Centroid (ROC) Jahraini, Ratu Adnin; Sanwani, Sanwani; Sulthon, Besus Maula; Siregar, Syamsimahara; Hutabarat, Pahotton; Mesran, Mesran
Bulletin of Computer Science Research Vol. 6 No. 1 (2025): December 2025
Publisher : Forum Kerjasama Pendidikan Tinggi (FKPT)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47065/bulletincsr.v6i1.918

Abstract

In this selection of the best TikTok Content Creator using the Rank Order Centroid (ROC) and Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) methods. ROC and SAW were chosen because they are simple and efficient and can allow proper weighting of criteria and proper ranking. Many factors must be considered in choosing TikTok Content Creators. The selection of the best TikTok content creators is useful for helping audiences assess and select quality content and can add insight and entertainment that is useful for the future. Judging must also be based on predetermined criteria. There are five criteria that are assessed such as creativity, originality, content quality, interaction, ethics. The results of the assessment of each criterion will be normalised and the total weight calculated. The system will sort from the highest value as the first and last rank. With the existence of a decision support system that uses the ROC and SAW methods, it can make it faster and easier to make decisions to choose the best TikTok Content Creator according to predetermined criteria. Ranking results in applying the SAW method shown in table 5 above, the best alternative is the first rank produced, namely A10 with a final acquisition value of 0.956. The second rank is alternative A3 with a final value of 0.935 and the third rank is alternative A1 with a final value of 0.909.
Co-Authors Besus Maula Sulthon Hutabarat, Pahotton Mesran, Mesran SANWANI SANWANI, SANWANI Siregar, Syamsimahara