Selection an airsoft rifle for urban combat using the hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model BORDA-AHP-SAW and Entropy-Critic-FanMa-SAW
Abstract
Тhe paper presents the method of applying multi-criteria decision-making methods in order to select an airsoft replica of an automatic rifle for practicing tactical actions in urban combat. First, the criteria were ranked by experts according to which the alternative would be selected. By applying the BORDA and AHP methods, the weighting coefficients of the criteria were determined, and then the most favorable alternative was selected by applying the SAW method. The selection procedure was repeated when the selection was made without experts, but the weighting coefficients of the criteria were determined by the objective methods Entropy-Critic-FanMa and a comparative analysis of the results was performed. The aim of the paper is to select the most effective airsoft rifle for professional and civilian use for practicing tactical actions and actions in urban combat by combining multi-criteria decision-making methods. Minimal resource consumption is always the starting point today, while ensuring the most efficient way to practice tactical actions that are realistic to real conditions.
For the first time, the method of determining the weighting coefficients of criteria using multidisciplinary methods of multi-criteria decision-making on a specific problem in the field of Tactics with weapons systems was shown with expert opinion, and then the results were compared if experts were not engaged. Experts in the field of tactics and weapons from the Military Academy first selected and ranked seven criteria. Then, their opinions were sublimated using the BORDA method, and the results were entered into the AHP method to select the weighting coefficients of the criteria. Finally, the most favorable alternative was selected based on the SAW method. Since the above procedure for determining the weighting coefficients of the criteria was calculated for the first time by engaging experts in this way, the procedure for selecting the most favorable alternative was repeated, without engaging experts, but the weights of the criteria were determined using objective methods and the results were compared through comparative analysis. The alternatives are five airsoft rifles with a hopup chamber, some of which are used at the Military Academy and in special army units for training in various combat-tactical actions, and in civilian life they are used by airsoft weapon enthusiasts.
Choosing the most affordable airsoft rifle, which will provide minimal resource consumption and maximum performance and the greatest possible realism to the combat situation when practicing tactical actions in an urban environment.
The solution, with a comparative analysis of the results obtained in two ways, takes into account the simultaneous optimization of seven criteria, which differ slightly, in order to select the most effective airsoft rifle for practicing tactical procedures in order to provide conditions that are closest to a real combat situation at short distances.
References
Abbas, A. E. (2003). Entropy methods for univariate distributions in decision analysis. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 659, No. 1, pp. 339-349). American Institute of Physics. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1570551
Abbas, A. E. (2006). Entropy methods for joint distributions in decision analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(1), 146-159. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2005.861803
Ali, S. I., Lalji, S. M., Haider, S. A., Haneef, J., Husain, N., Yahya, A., ... & Arfeen, Z. A. (2024). Risk prioritization in a core preparation experiment using fuzzy VIKOR integrated with Shannon entropy method. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 15(2), 102421. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2023.102421
Amalia, F. S., & Alita, D. (2023). Application of SAW method in decision support system for determination of exemplary students. Journal of Information Technology, Software Engineering and Computer Science, 1(1), 14-21. Available at: https://doi.org/10.58602/itsecs.v1i1.9
Araujo, J. V. G. A., Moreira, M. Â. L., Gomes, C. F. S., dos Santos, M., de Araújo Costa, I. P., de Pina Corriça, J. V., ... & de Moura Pereira, D. A. (2023). Selection of a vehicle for Brazilian Navy using the multi-criteria method to support decision-making TOPSIS-M. Procedia Computer Science, 221, 261-268. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2023.07.036
Ashour, M., & Mahdiyar, A. (2024). A comprehensive state-of-the-art survey on the recent modified and hybrid analytic hierarchy process approaches. Applied Soft Computing, 150, 111014. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2023.111014
Ayvaz, B., Tatar, V., Sağır, Z., & Pamucar, D. (2024). An integrated Fine-Kinney risk assessment model utilizing Fermatean fuzzy AHP-WASPAS for occupational hazards in the aquaculture sector. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 186, 232-251. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2024.04.025
Barberà, S., Bossert, W. & Moreno-Ternero, J.D. 2023. Wine rankings and the Borda method. Journal of Wine Economics, 18(2), pp.122-138. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/jwe.2023.7
Basilio, M. P., Pereira, V., & Yigit, F. (2023). New hybrid EC-promethee method with multiple iterations of random weight ranges: applied to the choice of policing strategies. Mathematics, 11(21), 4432. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/math11214432
Basuri, T., Gazi, K. H., Bhaduri, P., Das, S. G., & Mondal, S. P. (2025). Decision-analytics-based Sustainable Location Problem - Neutrosophic CRITIC-COPRAS Assessment Model. Management Science Advances, 2(1), 19-58. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/msa2120257
Biswas, A., Gazi, K. H., Bhaduri, P., & Mondal, S. P. (2025). Site Selection for Girls Hostel in a University Campus by MCDM based Strategy. Spectrum of Decision Making and Applications, 2(1), 68-93. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/sdmap21202511
Biswas, S., Biswas, B., & Mitra, K. (2025b). A Novel Group Decision Making Model to Compare Online Shopping Platforms. Spectrum of Decision Making and Applications, 2(1), 1-27. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/sdmap2120259
Božanić, D., Borota, M., Štilić, A., Puška, A., & Milić, A. (2024). Fuzzy DIBR II-MABAC model for flood prevention: A case study of the river Veliki Rzav. Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, 4(1), 285-298. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/jdaic10031122024b
Briscilla, S. J., & Sundarrajan, R. (2024). A Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Employee Selection Using SAW and Profile Matching. Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics, 28(5), 1117-1125. Available at: https://doi.org/10.20965/jaciii.2024.p1117
Çalikoğlu, C., & Łuczak, A. (2024). Multidimensional assessment of SDI and HDI using TOPSIS and bilinear ordering. International Journal of Economic Sciences, 13(2), 116-128. Available at: https://doi.org/10.52950/ES.2024.13.2.007
Ciardiello, F., & Genovese, A. (2023). A comparison between TOPSIS and SAW methods. Annals of Operations Research, 325(2), 967-994. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05339-w
Costa, H.G. 2017. AHP-De Borda: a hybrid multicriteria ranking method. Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, 14(3), pp.281-287. Available at: https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2017.v14.n3.a1
Churchman, C.W., and R.L. Ackoff. (1954). An approximate measure of value. Journal of Operations Research Society of America, 2(1), 172–187. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2.2.172
Dağdeviren, M., Yavuz, S., & Kılınç, N. (2009). Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert systems with applications, 36(4), 8143-8151. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.016
Dağıstanlı, H. A. (2025). Weapon System Selection for Capability-Based Defense Planning using Lanchester Models integrated with Fuzzy MCDM in Computer Assisted Military Experiment. Knowledge and Decision Systems with Applications, 1, 11-23. Available at: https://doi.org/10.59543/kadsa.v1i.13601
Diakoulaki, D., Mavrotas, G., & Papayannakis, L. (1995). Determining objective weights in multiple criteria problems: The critic method. Computers & Operations Research, 22(7), 763-770. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(94)00059-H
Dustin, B., & Firmansyah, H. (2023). Analisis Keberadaan Senjata Airsoft Gun dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Negara Republik Indonesia. Syntax Literate; Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia, 8(11), 6347-6360. Available at: https://doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v8i11.13738
Endo, S., Ishida, N., & Yamaguchi, T. (2001). Tear in the trabecular meshwork caused by an airsoft gun. American journal of ophthalmology, 131(5), 656-657. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00877-1
Eti, S., & Yüksel, S. (2024). Integrating pythagorean fuzzy SAW and entropy in decision-making for legal effectiveness in renewable energy projects: Legal effectiveness in renewable energy projects. Computer and Decision Making: An International Journal, 1, 13-22. Available at: https://doi.org/10.59543/comdem.v1i.10043
Genc, T. (2015). Application of ELECTRE III and PROMETHEE II in evaluating the military tanks. International Journal of Procurement Management, 8(4), 457-475. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPM.2015.070743
Guan, J., Liu, J., Chen, H., & Bi, W. (2024). A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Equipment Evaluation Based on Cloud Model and VIKOR Method. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science & Applications, 15(7). Available at: https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2024.01507127
Ilmiyah, N.F., Al Hasani, S.Z.N. & Renaningtyas, D. 2023. Combination of saw-topsis and borda count methods in sequencing potential convalescent plasma donors. Barekeng: Jurnal Ilmu Matematika dan Terapan, 17(3), pp.1521-1532. Available at: https://doi.org/10.30598/barekengvol17iss3pp1521-1532
Jaynes, E. T. (1982). On the rationale of maximum-entropy methods. Proceedings of the IEEE, 70(9), 939-952. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/PROC.1982.12425
Jokić, Ž., Radovanović, S., Petrović, A., & Delibašić, B. (2025). Razvoj sistema za podršku odlučivanju u procesu obuke vojnika. InfoM, 24(79/80), 14-21. Available at: https://rfos.fon.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/2940 [Accessed: 10 April 2025]
Jokic, Z., Delibasic, B., & Randjelovic, A. (2024). Selection of Rifle Caliber in Rearming Process of the Serbian Army. Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies, 29(1), 41-52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7595/management.fon.2021.0011
Jones, M.A. & Wilson, J. 2024. The Colley Method is an Extension of the Borda Count. Mathematics Magazine, 97(2), pp.140-150. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/0025570X.2024.2312781
Karel, T., & Plašil, M. (2024). Application of hierarchical Bayesian models for modeling economic costs in the implementation of new diagnostic tests. International journal of economic sciences, 13(2), 20-37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.52950/ES.2024.13.2.002
Keleş, N. (2024). A comparative evaluation of multi-criteria decision-making framework for armed unmanned aerial vehicle. International Journal of Intelligent Unmanned Systems, 12(4), 433-453. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIUS-03-2023-0026
Kim, H. C., Son, W. J., Lee, J. S., & Cho, I. S. (2024). Identification of maritime areas with high vessel traffic based on polygon shape similarity. IEEE Access. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3422398
Kizielewicz, B., & Sałabun, W. (2024). SITW Method: A New Approach to Re-identifying Multi-criteria Weights in Complex Decision Analysis. Spectrum of Mechanical Engineering and Operational Research, 1(1), 215-226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/smeor11202419
Kress, M., & MacKay, N. (2025). Modeling Civilian and Militant Casualties in Asymmetric Wars: The Case of Gaza 2024. Spectrum of Operational Research, 2(1), 259-267. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/sor21202518
Krishnan, A. R. (2024). Research trends in criteria importance through intercriteria correlation (CRITIC) method: a visual analysis of bibliographic data using the Tableau software. Information Discovery and Delivery. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-02-2024-0030
Krstic, B., Petrovic, J., & Stanišić, T. (2015). Analysis of key indicators of economic dimensions of spas'sustainable development in Serbia as tourism destinations. Ekonomika, Journal for Economic Theory and Practice and Social Issues, 61(3), 61-71. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.212937
Lee, C. I., Kim, D. S., Kang, M. G., & Park, S. H. (2023). A Study on the Effectness of Military Training with Air soft Gun. The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology, 9(6), 807-812. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17703/JCCT.2023.9.6.807
Lin, H. & Lin, D. 2023. Evaluation of Online Learners’ Learning Performance Based on Fuzzy Borda Method. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(14), pp.244-255. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i14.40397
Lisboa, R. M., & de Moraes, T. F. B. (2025). “Airsoft”: Proposta de implementação como modalidade de treinamento na pmto. Revista Foco, 18(1), e7601-e7601. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54751/revistafoco.v18n1-110
Lubis, A. H., Khairina, N., & Riandra, M. F. (2021). Comparison between Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods through Objective Weighting Method in Determining Best Employee. International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer Science & Technology (IJIRCST) Available at: https://doi.org/10.55524/ijircst.2023.11.2.10
Mallick, R., Pramanik, S., & Giri, B. (2023). Neutrosophic MAGDM Based on CRITIC-EDAS Strategy Using Geometric Aggregation Operator. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 33(4), 683-698. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR221017016M
Markatos, D. N., & Pantelakis, S. G. (2023). Implementation of a holistic MCDM-based approach to assess and compare aircraft, under the prism of sustainable aviation. Aerospace, 10(3), 240. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace10030240
Martinez, L. E. (2008). Force-on-Force Police Training Using Airsoft: A Manual for the Law Enforcement Trainer on the Use of Airsoft Non-Lethal Technology. Outskirts Press. Available at: https://books.google.rs/books?hl=sr&lr=&id=_XuQxMqKM_cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA2&dq=Martinez,+L.+E.+(2008).+Force-on-Force+Police+Training+Using+Airsoft:+A+Manual+for+the+Law+Enforcement+Trainer+on+the+Use+of+Airsoft+Non-Lethal+Technology.+Outskirts+Press.+ISBN:+978-1-4327-2684-3&ots=MBV4S-S9je&sig=uKC8K9-8vVA8IOAREAVsfBSiMXQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=falseISBN: 978-1-4327-2684-3 [Accessed: 10 April 2025]
Menet, G., & Szarucki, M. (2020). Impact of value co-creation on international customer satisfaction in the airsoft industry: does country of origin matter?. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(10), 223. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13100223
Nedeljković, M., Puška, A., & Suzić, R. (2024). The effects of applying objective criteria weight determination in tractor selection. Akademski pregled, 7(1), 82-95. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7251/AP2401082
Petrovic, N., Jovanovic, V., Markovic, S., Marinkovic, D., & Petrovic, M. (2024). Multicriteria sustainability assessment of transport modes: A European Union case study for 2020. Journal of green economy and low-carbon development, 3(1), 36-44. Available at: https://doi.org/10.56578/jgelcd030104
Pratama, B., & Aryanto, J. (2024). Optimalisasi Pengelolaan Data Member Club Airsoft Gun sebagai Strategi Transformasi Digital untuk Memfasilitasi Hobi Masyarakat. Decode: Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi Informasi, 4(3), 1166-1179. Available at: https://doi.org/10.20527/jtamlanting.v12i2.2210
Putra, R. I. P., Azizah, S. A. S., & Poedjioetami, E. P. E. (2024). Penerapan Konsep Dinamis pada Bentuk Bangunan Real Airsoft Gun Games. Tekstur (Jurnal Arsitektur), 5(2), 191-200. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15391/prrht.2024-9(5).01
Radovanović, M., Božanić, D., Tešić, D., Puška, A., Hezam, I., & Jana, C. (2023). Application of hybrid DIBR-FUCOM-LMAW-Bonferroni-grey-EDAS model in multicriteria decision-making. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering, 21(3), 387-403. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME230824036R
Radovanović, M., Petrovski, A., Cirkin, E., Behlić, A., Jokić, Željko, Chemezov, D., Hashimov, E. G., Bouraima, M. B., & Jana, C. (2024). Application of the new hybrid model LMAW-G-EDAS multi-criteria decision-making when choosing an assault rifle for the needs of the army. Journal of decision analytics and intelligent computing, 4(1), 16-31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/jdaic10021012024r
Rajurkar, K. S., Khade, S. P., Sawant, O. M., Dobe, M. P., & Kamble, A. G. (2023). Selection of fighter aircraft by using multi attributes decision making methods. International Journal of Process Management and Benchmarking, 14(4), 460-477. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPMB.2023.132217
Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New York, Available at: https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/51627807/saaty-libre.pdf?1486172407=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DSaaty.pdf&Expires=1744374781&Signature=dAmij-A6kHSwr-mB~tEu-mBdiyNDP4UOgLukpPvZfupJyab5A1MzOR5DrhIqKPoC~KletpsAzZ3RSHEBnM7F-29bjVsjNSzjgSoB5lIKGH4ROvzJJwxTMkSayA1JReZDglHyLbW8uYU3v0NQvEfLklNFTSe3CT4qdAqOAmgFKsGFW2lxDjvDpyxpKqcLXGES0Hda92CRSWPxMGGqhj~fdLe~kIurabU4DV9LZufqX4jBC8yZ98fwt5lHa7VMqZ8YHgmzeZOO6cCTp2HhQYi83MXejWHkoaZ-AoJpAr4c4KUrTm9c0gpENMnCmbDXtbaVl44ooCvnPt-ESwzq4VtAzQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA [Accessed: 11 April 2025]
Saari, D.G. 2023. Selecting a voting method: the case for the Borda count. Constitutional Political Economy, 34(3), pp.357-366. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-022-09380-y
Sakata, M., & Sato, M. (1990). Accurate structure analysis by the maximum-entropy method. Foundations of Crystallography, 46(4), 263-270. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108767389012377
Shageev, D. A. (2022). Search for a measurement standard in the modifications of the first generation AHP for the method of effective projects selection and other fields of science. Воронежского Государственного Университета Инженерных Технологий Вестник ВГУИТ 2022, Том. 84, №, 388. Available at: https://doi.org/10.20914/2310-1202-2022-1-388-409
Shanmugapriya, P., Selvakumari, K., & Kavitha, S. (2024). Entropy Method of Multi-Attribute Decision-Making Problems. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 491, p. 02001). EDP Sciences. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202449102001
Srðević, B. (2005). Nepristrasna ocena značaja kriterijuma u višekriterijumskoj optimizaciji. Vodoprivreda, Available at: https://www.vodoprivreda.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/neprostrasna.pdf (in Serbian). ISBN 0350-0519 [Accessed: 15 March 2025]
Srđević B, Medeiros Y, Faria A, & Schaer M. (2003). Objective Evaluation of Performance Criteria for a Reservoir System. Vodoprivreda, 35(3-4), 163-176. Available at: https://www.vodoprivreda.net/objektivno-vrednovanje-kriterijuma-performanse-sistema-akumulacija/ (in Serbian). ISBN 0350-0519 [Accessed: 10 April 2025]
Stević, Ž., Baydaş, M., Kavacık, M., Ayhan, E., & Marinković, D. (2024). Selection of data conversion technique via sensitivity-performance matching: Ranking of small e-vans with probid method. Facta Universitatis, Series: Mechanical Engineering, 22(4), 643-671. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22190/FUME240305023S
Strong, B., & Coady, M. (2014). Penetrating facial injury with an “Airsoft” pellet: a case report. British journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 52(9), e129-e131. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.05.007
Sun, Q., Wu, J., Chiclana, F., Wang, S., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Yager, R. R. (2023). An approach to prevent weight manipulation by minimum adjustment and maximum entropy method in social network group decision making. Artificial Intelligence Review, 56(7), 7315-7346. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10361-8
Suo, M., Xing, J., Ma, K., Xiao, D., & Song, D. (2025). Fighter optimal selection based on sequential multi-criteria decision-making with uncertainty measurement. The Aeronautical Journal, 1-23. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/aer.2024.125
Susilo, J., & Wahyuni, E. G. (2024). Comparison of SAW and TOPSIS Methods in Decision Support Systems for Contraceptive Selection. International Journal Software Engineering and Computer Science (IJSECS), 4(2), 792-807. Available at: https://doi.org/10.35870/ijsecs.v4i2.2815
Tešić, D., Božanić, D. & Khalilzadeh, M. 2024. Enhancing Multi-Criteria Decision-Making with Fuzzy Logic: An Advanced Defining Interrelationships Between Ranked II Method Incorporating Triangular Fuzzy Numbers. Journal of Intelligent Management Decision, 3(1), pp.56-67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.56578/jimd030105
Tešić, D., Božanić, D., & Milić, A. (2023). A multi-criteria decision-making model for pontoon bridge selection: An application of the DIBR II-NWBM-FF MAIRCA approach. Journal of Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, 2(4), 212-223. Available at: https://doi.org/10.56578/jemse020403
Tešić, D., Božanić, D., Radovanović, M., & Petrovski, A. (2023). Optimising assault boat selection for military operations: An application of the DIBR II-BM-CoCoSo MCDM model. J. Intell. Manag. Decis, 2(4), 160-171. Available at: https://doi.org/10.56578/jimd020401
Wang, J., Setiawansyah, S., & Rahmanto, Y. (2024). Decision Support System for Choosing the Best Shipping Service for E-Commerce Using the SAW and CRITIC Methods. Jurnal Ilmiah Informatika dan Ilmu Komputer (JIMA-ILKOM), 3(2), 101-109. Available at: https://doi.org/10.58602/jima-ilkom.v3i2.32
Wardany, R., & Zahedi, (2024). A Study Comparative of PSI, PSI-TOPSIS, and PSI-MABAC Methods in Analyzing the Financial Performance of State-Owned Enterprises Companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. Yugoslav Journal Of Operations Research, Online first. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2298/YJOR240115017W
Yalçın, G. C., Kara, K., & Özyürek, H. (2025). Evaluating Financial Performance of Companies in the Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index Using the CRITIC-MABAC Method. Spectrum of Operational Research, 2(1), 323-346. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/sor21202530
Zhong, S., Chen, Y., & Miao, Y. (2023). Using improved CRITIC method to evaluate thermal coal suppliers. Scientific reports, 13(1), 195. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27495-6
Žižović, M., & Albijanić, M. (2025). An Implementation of the Entropy Method for Determining Weighing Coefficients in a Multicriteria Optimization of Public Procurements. Spectrum of Engineering and Management Sciences, 3(1), 28-44. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31181/sems31202528z
Константинов, В. Н., & Шохирев, В. В. (2023). Использование пейнтбольного и страйкбольного оружия для повышения стрелковой подготовленности обучающихся. Полицейская деятельность, (5), 76-88. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7256/2454-0692.2023.5.43904
Copyright (c) 2025 Aleksandar Aleksic, Miša Živković, Damir Projović, Milorad Petronijević, Darko Bozanić
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Proposed Creative Commons Copyright Notices
Proposed Policy for Military Technical Courier (Journals That Offer Open Access)
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).