Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE

Year 2022, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 114 - 122, 31.12.2022

Ömer Ramadan Yavuz Selim Özdemir

Abstract

Istanbul stands out as a center with a high population density, similar to the large metropolitan areas of Europe. The traffic and population density increase in Istanbul makes it attractive for people to use the rail system for public transportation. In this study, the economic and financial evaluation of the rail system projects is made in terms of the municipality. Furthermore, the social-environmental review, public demand, and urgent needs were also considered. Thus, selecting the best alternative was evaluated for a better solution to reducing traffic congestion and meeting people's needs. MCDM (Multi-Criteria Decision-Making) techniques are often used in prioritization, ranking, and finding the best alternative. This paper used a combination of the F-AHP (Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process) and the PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation) method. Three main criteria and ten sub-criteria were used to evaluate 33 alternative projects where three experts determined criteria weights.

Keywords

Rail System Fuzzy AHP PROMETHEE Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Project Selection

References

  • Abdullah, L., Chan, W., & Afshari, A. (2019). Application of PROMETHEE method for green supplier selection: a comparative result based on preference functions. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40092-018-0289-z
  • Aydin, N. (2017). A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems. Transport Policy, 55(February), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.02.001
  • Ayyildiz, E., & Taskin Gumus, A. (2021). Pythagorean fuzzy AHP based risk assessment methodology for hazardous material transportation: an application in Istanbul. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(27), 35798–35810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13223-y
  • Berk, A. B., & Can, G. F. (2022). Bir mühendislik firmasına ait şantiyelerinin iş sağlığı ve güvenliği açısından risk düzeylerinin değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 1–18. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=4366507f-a814-4c49-8b1f-bd10d28a366a.pdf
  • Blagojević, A., Kasalica, S., Stević, Ž., Tričkovič, G., & Pavelkić, V. (2021). Evaluation of safety degree at railway crossings in order to achieve sustainable traffic management: A novel integrated fuzzy MCDM model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020832
  • Blagojević, A., Stević, Ž., Marinković, D., Kasalica, S., & Rajilić, S. (2020). A novel entropy-fuzzy PIPRECIA-DEA model for safety evaluation of railway traffic. Symmetry, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12091479
  • Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5
  • Broniewicz, E., & Ogrodnik, K. (2021). A comparative evaluation of multi-criteria analysis methods for sustainable transport. Energies, 14(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/en14165100
  • Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9
  • Daǧdeviren, M., & Eraslan, E. (2008). Promethee siralama yöntemi̇ i̇le tedari̇kçí seçi̇mi̇. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00144
  • Eraslan, E. (2013). A multi-criteria usability assessment of similar types of touch screen mobile phones. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 20(3–4), 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1488
  • Gul, M., Celik, E., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2017). A fuzzy logic based PROMETHEE method for material selection problems. Beni-Suef University Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjbas.2017.07.002
  • Güler, M. A. (2022). Küresel Bulanık MULTIMOORA Yöntemi ile Zırhlı Askerî Araçların Performans Değerlendirilmesi. Güler Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 28–41. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=ed4017f5-ecff-4405-af30-de5f5d32d8e8.pdf
  • Gumus, A. T. (2009). Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2 PART 2), 4067–4074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.03.013
  • Gündoğdu, F. K., & Kahraman, C. (2019). Spherical fuzzy sets and spherical fuzzy TOPSIS method. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-181401
  • Hossain, M. K., & Thakur, V. (2021). Benchmarking health-care supply chain by implementing Industry 4.0: a fuzzy-AHP-DEMATEL approach. Benchmarking, 28(2), 556–581. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-05-2020-0268
  • Jasti, P. C., & Ram, V. V. (2019). Sustainable benchmarking of a public transport system using analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy logic: a case study of Hyderabad, India. Public Transport, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-019-00219-8
  • Jasti, P. C., & Vinayaka Ram, V. (2019). Integrated and Sustainable Benchmarking of Metro Rail System Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Logic: A Case Study of Mumbai. Urban Rail Transit, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-019-00107-1
  • Javanbarg, M. B., Scawthorn, C., Kiyono, J., & Shahbodaghkhan, B. (2012). Fuzzy AHP-based multicriteria decision making systems using particle swarm optimization. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 960–966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.095
  • Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ulukan, Z. (2003). Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09576050310503367
  • Kaya, T., & Kahraman, C. (2011). Multicriteria decision making in energy planning using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(6), 6577–6585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.081
  • Labbouz, S., Roy, B., Diab, Y., & Christen, M. (2008). Implementing a public transport line: multi-criteria decision-making methods that facilitate concertation. Operational Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-008-0003-9
  • Macharis, C., de Witte, A., & Ampe, J. (2009). The multi-actor, multi-criteria analysis methodology (MAMCA) for the evaluation of transport projects: Theory and practice. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 43(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.5670430206
  • Norouziyan, S. (2022). Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process Method and VIKOR for ABS Market of Countrie. Norouziyan Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 19–27. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=4d6fd7e3-1615-4cbc-bf85-f255e0e97ab8.pdf
  • Özdemir, Y. S., & Üsküdar, A. (2020). Strategy selection by using interval type-2 fuzzy mcdm and an application. Journal of Engineering Research (Kuwait), 8(3). https://doi.org/10.36909/JER.V8I3.8176
  • Peterson, E. W. F. (2017). The role of population in economic growth. SAGE Open, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017736094
  • Piya, S., Shamsuzzoha, A., Azizuddin, M., Al-Hinai, N., & Erdebilli, B. (2022). Integrated Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Method to Analyze Green Management Practice in Hospitality Industry in the Sultanate of Oman. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031118
  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Education, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME10-01-0028
  • Stoilova, S. (2018). An integrated approach for selection of intercity transport schemes on railway networks. Promet - Traffic - Traffico, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v30i4.2673
  • Stoilova, S., Munier, N., Kendra, M., & Skrúcaný, T. (2020). Multi-criteria evaluation of railway network performance in countries of the TEN-T orient-east med corridor. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041482
  • Tashayo, B., Honarbakhsh, A., Azma, A., & Akbari, M. (2020). Combined Fuzzy AHP–GIS for Agricultural Land Suitability Modeling for a Watershed in Southern Iran. Environmental Management, 66(3), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01310-8
  • Turcksin, L., Bernardini, A., & Macharis, C. (2011). A combined AHP-PROMETHEE approach for selecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate a clean vehicle fleet. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.08.104
  • Uskudar, A., Turkan, Y. S., Ozdemir, Y. S., & Oz, A. H. (2019). Fuzzy AHP-Center of Gravity Method Helicopter Selection and Application. Proceedings of 2019 8th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management, ICITM 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITM.2019.8710703

Year 2022, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 114 - 122, 31.12.2022

Ömer Ramadan Yavuz Selim Özdemir

Abstract

References

  • Abdullah, L., Chan, W., & Afshari, A. (2019). Application of PROMETHEE method for green supplier selection: a comparative result based on preference functions. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40092-018-0289-z
  • Aydin, N. (2017). A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems. Transport Policy, 55(February), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.02.001
  • Ayyildiz, E., & Taskin Gumus, A. (2021). Pythagorean fuzzy AHP based risk assessment methodology for hazardous material transportation: an application in Istanbul. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(27), 35798–35810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13223-y
  • Berk, A. B., & Can, G. F. (2022). Bir mühendislik firmasına ait şantiyelerinin iş sağlığı ve güvenliği açısından risk düzeylerinin değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 1–18. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=4366507f-a814-4c49-8b1f-bd10d28a366a.pdf
  • Blagojević, A., Kasalica, S., Stević, Ž., Tričkovič, G., & Pavelkić, V. (2021). Evaluation of safety degree at railway crossings in order to achieve sustainable traffic management: A novel integrated fuzzy MCDM model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020832
  • Blagojević, A., Stević, Ž., Marinković, D., Kasalica, S., & Rajilić, S. (2020). A novel entropy-fuzzy PIPRECIA-DEA model for safety evaluation of railway traffic. Symmetry, 12(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12091479
  • Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: The Promethee method. European Journal of Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(86)90044-5
  • Broniewicz, E., & Ogrodnik, K. (2021). A comparative evaluation of multi-criteria analysis methods for sustainable transport. Energies, 14(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/en14165100
  • Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9
  • Daǧdeviren, M., & Eraslan, E. (2008). Promethee siralama yöntemi̇ i̇le tedari̇kçí seçi̇mi̇. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00144
  • Eraslan, E. (2013). A multi-criteria usability assessment of similar types of touch screen mobile phones. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 20(3–4), 185–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.1488
  • Gul, M., Celik, E., Gumus, A. T., & Guneri, A. F. (2017). A fuzzy logic based PROMETHEE method for material selection problems. Beni-Suef University Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjbas.2017.07.002
  • Güler, M. A. (2022). Küresel Bulanık MULTIMOORA Yöntemi ile Zırhlı Askerî Araçların Performans Değerlendirilmesi. Güler Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 28–41. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=ed4017f5-ecff-4405-af30-de5f5d32d8e8.pdf
  • Gumus, A. T. (2009). Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two step fuzzy-AHP and TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2 PART 2), 4067–4074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.03.013
  • Gündoğdu, F. K., & Kahraman, C. (2019). Spherical fuzzy sets and spherical fuzzy TOPSIS method. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-181401
  • Hossain, M. K., & Thakur, V. (2021). Benchmarking health-care supply chain by implementing Industry 4.0: a fuzzy-AHP-DEMATEL approach. Benchmarking, 28(2), 556–581. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-05-2020-0268
  • Jasti, P. C., & Ram, V. V. (2019). Sustainable benchmarking of a public transport system using analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy logic: a case study of Hyderabad, India. Public Transport, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-019-00219-8
  • Jasti, P. C., & Vinayaka Ram, V. (2019). Integrated and Sustainable Benchmarking of Metro Rail System Using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Fuzzy Logic: A Case Study of Mumbai. Urban Rail Transit, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-019-00107-1
  • Javanbarg, M. B., Scawthorn, C., Kiyono, J., & Shahbodaghkhan, B. (2012). Fuzzy AHP-based multicriteria decision making systems using particle swarm optimization. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 960–966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.095
  • Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., & Ulukan, Z. (2003). Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP. Logistics Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/09576050310503367
  • Kaya, T., & Kahraman, C. (2011). Multicriteria decision making in energy planning using a modified fuzzy TOPSIS methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(6), 6577–6585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.081
  • Labbouz, S., Roy, B., Diab, Y., & Christen, M. (2008). Implementing a public transport line: multi-criteria decision-making methods that facilitate concertation. Operational Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-008-0003-9
  • Macharis, C., de Witte, A., & Ampe, J. (2009). The multi-actor, multi-criteria analysis methodology (MAMCA) for the evaluation of transport projects: Theory and practice. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 43(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.5670430206
  • Norouziyan, S. (2022). Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process Method and VIKOR for ABS Market of Countrie. Norouziyan Journal of Optimization & Decision Making, 1(1), 19–27. https://aybu.edu.tr/GetFile?id=4d6fd7e3-1615-4cbc-bf85-f255e0e97ab8.pdf
  • Özdemir, Y. S., & Üsküdar, A. (2020). Strategy selection by using interval type-2 fuzzy mcdm and an application. Journal of Engineering Research (Kuwait), 8(3). https://doi.org/10.36909/JER.V8I3.8176
  • Peterson, E. W. F. (2017). The role of population in economic growth. SAGE Open, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017736094
  • Piya, S., Shamsuzzoha, A., Azizuddin, M., Al-Hinai, N., & Erdebilli, B. (2022). Integrated Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Method to Analyze Green Management Practice in Hospitality Industry in the Sultanate of Oman. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031118
  • Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Education, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME10-01-0028
  • Stoilova, S. (2018). An integrated approach for selection of intercity transport schemes on railway networks. Promet - Traffic - Traffico, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v30i4.2673
  • Stoilova, S., Munier, N., Kendra, M., & Skrúcaný, T. (2020). Multi-criteria evaluation of railway network performance in countries of the TEN-T orient-east med corridor. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041482
  • Tashayo, B., Honarbakhsh, A., Azma, A., & Akbari, M. (2020). Combined Fuzzy AHP–GIS for Agricultural Land Suitability Modeling for a Watershed in Southern Iran. Environmental Management, 66(3), 364–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01310-8
  • Turcksin, L., Bernardini, A., & Macharis, C. (2011). A combined AHP-PROMETHEE approach for selecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate a clean vehicle fleet. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.08.104
  • Uskudar, A., Turkan, Y. S., Ozdemir, Y. S., & Oz, A. H. (2019). Fuzzy AHP-Center of Gravity Method Helicopter Selection and Application. Proceedings of 2019 8th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management, ICITM 2019. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITM.2019.8710703
There are 33 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Industrial Engineering
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ömer Ramadan This is me 0000-0001-6534-6342

Yavuz Selim Özdemir 0000-0002-4418-2163

Publication Date December 31, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 1 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Ramadan, Ö., & Özdemir, Y. S. (2022). Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE. Journal of Optimization and Decision Making, 1(2), 114-122.
AMA Ramadan Ö, Özdemir YS. Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE. JODM. December 2022;1(2):114-122.
Chicago Ramadan, Ömer, and Yavuz Selim Özdemir. “Prioritization of Rail System Projects by Using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE”. Journal of Optimization and Decision Making 1, no. 2 (December 2022): 114-22.
EndNote Ramadan Ö, Özdemir YS (December 1, 2022) Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE. Journal of Optimization and Decision Making 1 2 114–122.
IEEE Ö. Ramadan and Y. S. Özdemir, “Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE”, JODM, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 114–122, 2022.
ISNAD Ramadan, Ömer - Özdemir, Yavuz Selim. “Prioritization of Rail System Projects by Using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE”. Journal of Optimization and Decision Making 1/2 (December 2022), 114-122.
JAMA Ramadan Ö, Özdemir YS. Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE. JODM. 2022;1:114–122.
MLA Ramadan, Ömer and Yavuz Selim Özdemir. “Prioritization of Rail System Projects by Using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE”. Journal of Optimization and Decision Making, vol. 1, no. 2, 2022, pp. 114-22.
Vancouver Ramadan Ö, Özdemir YS. Prioritization of rail system projects by using FUZZY AHP and PROMETHEE. JODM. 2022;1(2):114-22.
 Download Cover Image