Selection of the Most Suitable GIS Software with Fuzzy DEMATEL And Fuzzy VIKOR Methods

Öz

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) consist of projects that require high costs. Choosing the right software programs is vital for GIS projects to achieve successful results. Although GIS software is tools that enable working with spatial data, spatial data can be used for various purposes such as mapping, analysis, visualization and decision-making. GIS software has different features, capabilities, strengths and weaknesses. Therefore, it is very important to choose the most appropriate GIS software to achieve the determined goals. Based on this importance, the aim of the study is to determine the most suitable GIS software program for companies and professional users operating in areas such as international logistics, transportation, spatial planning, environmental management, and international marketing by using Fuzzy DEMATEL and Fuzzy VIKOR methods. First of all, what is effective in the selection of the software program; Eleven criteria were determined, including ease of use, price/cost, being internet-based, speed of the program, visuality of the outputs, technical support, reliability, interface integration, ability to process data in different formats, module diversity and personalization of the program screen. Then, the weights of these criteria were determined by the Fuzzy DEMATEL method. These criterion weights were integrated into the Fuzzy VIKOR method and the five most widely used GIS software programs (ARCGIS, HEXAGON, MAPINFO, QGIS and GLOBAL MAPPER) were ranked. According to the findings, the optimal GIS software program was ARCGIS. ArcGIS was ranked highest, followed by QGIS, MapInfo, Hexagon, and Global Mapper

Anahtar Kelimeler

• GIS
• Software Selection
• Fuzzy DEMATEL
• Fuzzy VIKOR

Proje Numarası

YOK

Etik Beyan

Ethics committee approval was received for this study from the ethics committee of Giresun University (Date: December 6, 2023, Number:11/32 and E-50288587-604.01.01-2300016744 ).

Bulanık DEMATEL ve Bulanık VIKOR Yöntemleriyle En Uygun CBS Yazılımı Seçimi

Öz

Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri (CBS), yüksek maliyetler gerektiren projelerden oluşmaktadır. Oluşturulan CBS projelerinin başarılı sonuçlara ulaşmasında doğru yazılım programlarının seçilmesi hayati önem taşımaktadır. CBS yazılımları, konumsal verilerle çalışılmasını sağlayan araçlar olmakla birlikte, konumsal veriler, haritalama, analiz, görselleştirme ve karar verme gibi çeşitli amaçlar için kullanılabilmektedir. CBS yazılımlarının farklı özellikleri, yetenekleri, güçlü ve zayıf yönleri vardır. Bu nedenle belirlenen amaçlara ulaşmak için en uygun CBS yazılımını seçmek oldukça önemlidir. Bu önem doğrultusunda, çalışmanın amacı, Bulanık DEMATEL ve Bulanık VIKOR yöntemlerini kullanarak uluslararası lojistik, ulaşım, mekansal planlama, çevre yönetimi ve uluslararası pazarlama gibi alanlarda faaliyet gösteren şirketler ve profesyonel kullanıcılar için en uygun CBS yazılım programını belirlemektir. İlk olarak yazılım programının seçiminde etkili olan; kolaylığı, fiyat/maliyet, internet tabanlı olması, programın hızı, çıktıların görselliği, teknik destek, güvenilirlik, arayüz entegrasyonu, farklı formatta veri işleme yeteneği, modül çeşitliliği ve program ekranının kişileştirilebilmesi olmak üzere on bir kritere belirlenmiştir. Ardından bu kriterlerin ağırlıkları Bulanık DEMATEL yöntemi ile tespit edilmiştir. Bu kriter ağırlıkları Bulanık VIKOR yöntemine entegre edilerek en yaygın kullanılan beş CBS yazılım programlarının (ARCGIS, HEXAGON, MAPINFO, QGIS ve GLOBAL MAPPER) sıralaması yapılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre, en uygun CBS yazılım programı ARCGIS olmuştur. ARCGIS programını sırasıyla QGIS, MAPINFO, HEXAGON ve GLOBAL MAPPER programları izlemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• CBS
• Yazılım Seçimi
• Bulanık DEMATEL
• Bulanık VIKOR

Proje Numarası

YOK

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma için Giresun Üniversitesi Etik Kurulu’ndan etik kurul onayı alınmıştır (Tarih: 6 Aralık 2023, Sayı: 11/32 ve E-50288587-604.01.01-2300016744).

Kaynakça

1. Aghajani, D., Abbaspour, M., Radfar, R., & Mohammadi, A. (2019). Using Web-GIS technology as a smart tool for resiliency management to monitor wind farms performances (Ganjeh site, Iran). International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 16, 5011-5022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-2091-2
2. Ayağ, Z. (2010). A combined fuzzy AHP-simulation approach to CAD software selection. International Journal of General Systems, 39(7), 731-756. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081079.2010.495190
3. Baykasoğlu, A., Kaplanoğlu, V., Durmuşoğlu, Z. D. U. & Şahin, C. (2013). Integrating fuzzy DEMATEL and fuzzy hierarchical TOPSIS methods for truck selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(3), 899-907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.046
4. Bevilacqua, M., Ciarapica, F., E. & Marchhetti, B. (2012). Development and test of a new fuzzy- QFD approach for characterizing customers rating of extra virgin olive oil. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 75- 84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.09.005
5. Bottani, E. & Rizzi, A. (2006). Strategic management of logistics service: A fuzzy QFD approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(2), 585-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.11.006
6. Bucklin, D., & Basille, M. (2018). Rpostgis: Linking R with a PostGIS Spatial Database. R Journal, 10(1), 251-268. DOI:10.32614/RJ-2018-025
7. Büyüközkan, G. & Çiftçi, G. (2012). A novel hybrid MCDM approach based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS to evaluate green suppliers. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(3), 3000-3011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.162
8. Camargo, L. R., & Stoeglehner, G. (2018). Spatiotemporal modelling for integrated spatial and energy planning. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 8(32), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-018-0174-z

9. Chamzini, A., Y. & Yakhchali, S., H. (2012). Tunnel boring machine (TBM) selection using fuzzy multicriteria decision making methods. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 30, 194-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2012.02.021
10. Chan, F., T., S. & Kumar, N. (2007). Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended ahp-based approach. Omega The International Journal of Management Science, 35(4), 417-431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.08.004
11. Chantraket, R., Uttaruk, P., Skole, D. L., Samek, J. H., & Castaneda, O. (2014). Internet-based development of medicinal plants geospatial system in Phu Phan forest complex: northeastern Thailand. Agriculture and Natural Resources, 48(2), 227-240.
12. Chen, L. Y. & Wang, T. C. (2009). Optimizing partners’ choice in Is/IT outsourcing projects: The strategic decision of fuzzy VIKOR. International Journal of Production Economics, 120(1), 233-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.07.022
13. Çakır, E. (2018). Elektronik belge yönetim sistemi (EBYS) yazılımı seçiminde çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleri: Bir belediye örneği. Business, Economics and Management Research Journal- BEMAREJ, 1(1), 15-30.
14. Dalalah, D., Hayajneh, M. & Batieha, F. (2011). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision making model for supplier selection. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(7), 8384-8391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.031
15. Delen, D. (2019). Prescriptive analytics: The final frontier for evidence-based management and optimal decision making. FT Press.
16. Dikmen, F. C. & Kavakcı, I. (2022). Bütünleşik olarak kullanılan MACBETH, TOPSIS ve COPRAS yöntemleri ile kurumsal kaynak planlama yazılımı seçimi. Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 205-238. https://doi.org/10.31463/aicusbed.1067579 Dile, Y. T., Daggupati, P., George, C., Srinivasan, R., & Arnold, J. (2016). Introducing a new open source GIS user interface for the SWAT model. Environmental Modelling & Software, 85, 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.08.004
17. Eberle, J., & Strobl, C. (2012). Web-based geoprocessing and workflow creation for generating and providing remote sensing products. Geomatica, 66(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.5623/cig2012-005
18. Ecer, F. (2016). Selection of enterprise resource planning software by using ARAS Method. Uluslararası Alanya İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 89-98.
19. Eldrandaly, K. (2007). An AHP-Based Decision Model for GIS Software Selection. Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering, October 20-23, Alexandria, Egypt, p. 731-738.
20. Eldrandaly, K., & Naguib, S. (2013). A knowledge-based system for GIS software selection. The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, 10(2), 153-160.
21. Farooque, M., Jain, V., Zhang, A. & Li, Z. (2020). Fuzzy DEMATEL analysis of barriers to Blockchain-based life cycle assessment in China. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 147, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2020.106684
22. Garg, H., Vimala, J., Rajareega, S., Preethi, D., & Perez-Dominguez, L. (2022). Complex intuitionistic fuzzy soft SWARA-COPRAS approach: An application of ERP software selection. AIMS Mathematics, 7(4), 5895-5909. doi: 10.3934/math.2022327
23. Gür, Ş. & Eren, T. (2016). CRM software selection with multi criteria decision making methods for businesses. International Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2(2), 212-227.
24. Hanine, M., Boutkhoum, O., Tikniouine, A., & Agouti, T. (2016). Application of an integrated multi-criteria decision making AHP-TOPSIS methodology for ETL software selection. SpringerPlus, 5(1), 1-17. DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-1888-z
25. Hasanova, S. S., Pogosyan, L. V., Novikov, A. V., & Batashev, R. V. (2019). Urban geographic information system: Features of implementation and management. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering, 8(9), 34-39. DOI:10.35940/ijitee.H7505.078919
26. Huang, W., Ding, M., Li, Z., Zhuang, J., Yang, J., Li, X. & Dong, Y. (2022). An Efficient User-Friendly Integration Tool for Landslide Susceptibility Mapping Based on Support Vector Machines: SVM-LSM Toolbox. Remote Sensing, 14(14), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14143408
27. Ignatenko, E., Ribeiro, M., & Oliveira, M. D. (2022). Informing the Design of Data Visualization Tools to Monitor the COVID-19 Pandemic in Portugal: A Web-Delphi Participatory Approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(17), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191711012
28. Jadhav, A., & Sonar, R. (2009). Analytic hierarchy process (AHP), weighted scoring method (WSM), and hybrid knowledge based system (HKBS) for software selection: a comparative study. In 2009 Second International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering & Technology IEEE, p. 991-997.
29. Jakimow, B., van der Linden, S., Thiel, F., Frantz, D., & Hostert, P. (2020). Visualizing and labeling dense multi-sensor earth observation time series: The EO Time Series Viewer. Environmental Modelling & Software, 125, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104631
30. Jassbi, J., Mohamadnejad, F. & Nasrollahzadeh, H. (2011). A Fuzzy DEMATEL framework for modeling cause and effect relationships of strategy map. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(5), 5967-5973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.026
31. Kasauli, R., Knauss, E., Kanagwa, B., Nilsson, A., & Calikli, G. (2018). Safety-critical systems and agile development: A mapping study. In 2018 44th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA) IEEE. p. 470-477.
32. Kılıç, H. S., Demirci, A. E., & Delen, D. (2020). An integrated decision analysis methodology based on IF-DEMATEL and IF-ELECTRE for personnel selection. Decision Support Systems, 137, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2020.113360
33. Koska, A. & Erdem, M. B. (2021). Selection of enterprise resource planning software in the food industry: A case study with the analytical hierarchy process method. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(16), 555-571. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.970189
34. Kostic-Ljubisavljevic, A. & Samcovic, A. (2023). Selection of available GIS software for education of students of telecommunications engineering by AHP methodology. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 5001-2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12031-w
35. Krylov, S., Zagrebin, G., Mosolov, D., & Shkurenkova, I. (2020). Approaches and Solutions for Creating Atlases in Geographic Information Systems. Kartografijai Geoinformacije, 19(33), 4-17.
36. Lai, V. S., Trueblood, R. P., & Wong, B. K. (1999). Software selection: a case study of the application of the analytical hierarchical process to the selection of a multimedia authoring system. Information & Management, 36(4), 221-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(99)00021-X
37. Lasky, T. A., Swanston, T. B., & Yen, K. S. (2021). Automated Metadata Cataloging for Mobile Terrestrial Laser Scanning Data Management: Case Study. Journal of Surveying Engineering, 147(1), 05020008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SU.1943-5428.0000330
38. Lei, X., Wang, Y., Liao, W., Jiang, Y., Tian, Y., & Wang, H. (2011). Development of efficient and cost-effective distributed hydrological modeling tool MWEasyDHM based on open-source MapWindow GIS. Computers & Geosciences, 37(9), 1476-1489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.03.016
39. Li, R. J. (1999). Fuzzy method in group decision making. Computers & mathematics with Applications, 38, 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-1221(99)00172-8
40. Liakos, L., & Panagos, P. (2022). Challenges in the Geo-Processing of Big Soil Spatial Data. Land, 11(12), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11122287
41. Lin, C. J & Wu, W. W. (2008). A causal analytical method for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(1), 205-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.08.012
42. Muenchow, J., Schratz, P., & Brenning, A. (2017). RQGIS: Integrating R with QGIS for Statistical Geocomputing. R Journal, 9(2), 409-428.
43. Opricovic, S. & Tzeng, G. H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1
44. Opricovic, S. & Tzeng, G. H. (2007). Extended VIKOR methot in comparison with outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 178(2), 514-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.020
45. Opricovic, S. (2011). Fuzzy VIKOR with an application to water resources planning. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(10), 12983-12990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.097
46. Ömürbek, N., Makas, Y. & Ömürbek, V. (2015). Selecting software programs for enterprise project management with AHP and TOPSIS Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(21), 59-83.
47. Pandey, J. & Pathak, D. (2014). Geographic Informattion System. The Energy and Resources Institute. TERI Press.
48. Paul, A., Mal, P., Gulgulia, P. K., Srivastava, Y. K., & Chowdary, V. M. (2019). Spatial progression of estate property management system with customized freeware GIS. International Journal of Information Technology, 11(2), 341-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41870-018-0135-y
49. Piccoli, F., Locatelli, S. G., Schettini, R., & Napoletano, P. (2023). An Open-Source Platform for GIS Data Management and Analytics. Sensors, 23(8), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23083788
50. Rossetto, R., De Filippis, G., Borsi, I., Foglia, L., Cannata, M., Criollo, R., & Vázquez-Suñé, E. (2018). Integrating free and open source tools and distributed modelling codes in GIS environment for data-based groundwater management. Environmental Modelling & Software, 107, 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.06.007
51. Rostamzadeh, R. & Sofian, S. (2011). Prioritizing effective 7Ms to improve production systems performance using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS (case study). Expert Systems with Applications, 38(5), 5166-5177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.045
52. Seker, S., & Kahraman, C. (2022). A Pythagorean cubic fuzzy methodology based on TOPSIS and TODIM methods and its application to software selection problem. Soft Computing, 26(5), 2437-2450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-06469-8
53. Si, S. L., You, X. Y., Liu, H. C. & Zhang, P. (2018). DEMATEL Technique: A Systematic Review of the State-of-the-Art Literature on Methodologies and Applications. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2018, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3696457
54. Slocum, T. A., McMaster, R. B., Kessler, F. C., & Howard, H. H. (2022). Thematic cartography and geovisualization. CRC Press.
55. Sofian, H., Yunus, N. A. M., & Ahmad, R. (2022). Systematic Mapping: Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Software Engineering. IEEE Access, 10, 51021-51040. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3174115
56. Soh, L. K., Zhang, J., & Samal, A. (2006). A Task‐Based Approach to User Interface Design for a Web‐Based Hydrologic Information Systems. Transactions in GIS, 10(3), 417-449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9671.2006.01005.x
57. Steiniger, S., & Hunter, A. J. (2013). The 2012 free and open source GIS software map–A guide to facilitate research, development, and adoption. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 39, 136-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2012.10.003
58. Tecim, V. (2008). Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri, Harita Tabanlı Bilgi Yönetimi. RENK FORM Ofset Matbaacılık Ltd. Şti., 1. Baskı.
59. Thanh, N. V. (2022). Designing a MCDM Model for Selection of an Optimal ERP Software in Organization. Systems, 10(95), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10040095
60. Titti, G., Sarretta, A., Lombardo, L., Crema, S., Pasuto, A., & Borgatti, L. (2022). Mappin g susceptibility with open-source tools: a new plugin for QGIS. Frontiers in Earth Science, 229.
61. Tzeng, G. H., Teng, M. H., Chen, J. J & Opricovic, S. (2002). Multicriteria selection for a restaurant location in Taipei. Hospitality Management, 21(2), 171-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4319(02)00005-1
62. URL-1. Ucgis, University Consortium for Geographic Information Science. https://www.ucgis.org/, (last access:15.09.2023).
63. Usmani, R. S. A., Hashem, I. A. T., Pillai, T. R., Saeed, A., & Abdullahi, A. M. (2020). Geographic information system and big spatial data: A review and challenges. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS), 16(4), 101-145. DOI:10.4018/IJEIS.2020100106
64. Ünal, Z. & İpekçi Çetin, E. (2020). Selection of CRM software in hospitality industry by integrated DEMATEL and TODIM method. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 26(4), 779-788. doi: 10.5505/pajes.2020.08455
65. Vatansever, K. & Uluköy, M. (2013). Determining enterprise resource planning systems through fuzzy AHP and fuzzy moora methods: an implementation on manufacturing sector. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(2), 274-293.
66. Ventura-Molina, E., López-Martín, C., López-Yáñez, I., & Yáñez-Márquez, C. (2020). A novel data analytics method for predicting the delivery speed of software enhancement projects. Mathematics, 8(11), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8112002
67. Wang, T. C., Liang, J. L. & Ho, C. Y. (2006). Multi- criteria decision analysis by using fuzzy VIKOR. In Proceedings of international conference on service systems and service management, Troyes, France, vol. 2, p. 901-906.
68. Wang, W., Tian, Y., Zhu, Q. & Zhong, Y. (2017). Barriers for household e-waste collection in China: Perspectives from formal collecting enterprises in Liaoning Province. Journal of Cleaner Production, 153, 299-308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.202
69. Wei, D., Liu, H. & Shi, K. (2019). What are the key barriers for the further development of shale gas in China? A grey-DEMATEL approach. Energy Reports, 5, 298-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.02.010
70. Yeşilyurt, B., Karakuş, K., Gür, Ş. & Eren, T. (2019). Selection of the Package Program for Hospital Information Management Systems with Multi Criteria Decision Making Methods. Başkent Üniversitesi Ticari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(1), 1-21.
71. Yue, C. (2022). A VIKOR-based group decision-making approach to software reliability evaluation. Soft Computing, 26, 9445-9464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-022-07268-5
72. Yurtyapan, M. S., & Aydemir, E. (2021). ERP software selection using intuitionistic fuzzy and interval grey number-based MACBETH method. Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 12(1), 78-100.
73. Zhou, Q., Huang, W. & Zhang, Y. (2011). Identifying critical success factors in emergency management using a fuzzy DEMATEL method. Safety Science, 49(2), 243-252.