Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yaz Spor Okulu Seçiminde Entegre Bir Tereddütlü-Bulanık AHP ve TOPSIS Yaklaşımı

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2, 269 - 284, 01.04.2018
https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.306664

Öz

 Yaz spor okulları özellikle ilk ve ortaöğrenime devam
eden çocuklar için örgün öğretim sezonu bittikten sonra hem vakitlerini
eğlenceli bir şekilde değerlendirebildikleri hem de yeni şeyler
öğrenebildikleri bir alternatif olarak günümüzde önem kazanmaktadır. Bu yönde fazlalaşan
talep neticesinde sayıca artan yaz spor okullarından en iyisini seçmek, bir
karar verme problemi haline gelmektedir. Dolayısıyla bu makalede, bu yeni
çalışma alanındaki probleme analitik bir çözüm önerisi sunulmaktadır. Önerilen yaklaşımda
literatürde yakın zamanlarda sıkça kullanılmaya başlanan Tereddütlü-Bulanık AHP
(HF-AHP), TOPSIS tekniği ile entegre edilmiştir. Önerilen bu modelin, verilen
uygulama örneğinde 4 ana ve 15 alt seçim kriterinin önem dereceleri HF-AHP ile
belirlenmekte, 3 alternatif arasından en iyi yaz spor okulu TOPSIS metodu ile
seçilmektedir. Ayrıca yapılan duyarlılık analizi ile verilen kararın kriter
ağırlıklarına hassasiyeti de değerlendirilmektedir.




Kaynakça

  • [1] S. Duygulu, «TavsiyeEdiyorum.com» [Çevrimiçi]. Erişim Adresi: http://www.tavsiyeediyorum.com/makale_7038.htm. [Son Erişim:10 Ocak 2017]
  • [2] A. Güreş, «Aydindenge.com» [Çevrimiçi]. Erişim Adresi: http://www.aydindenge.com.tr/yazi/yrd-doc-dr-ali-gures/08/06/2013/yaz-spor-okullari. [Son Erişim:10 Nisan 2017]
  • [3] C. Polat ve Ö. Çelmeli, “Okul Öncesi Eğitim Kurumu Seçiminde Tüketici Tercih Etkenleri”, Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 8, 144-166, 2015.
  • [4] Ü.H. Özden, “Analitik Hiyerarşi yöntemi ile ilkokul seçimi”, Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, CİLT XXIV, Sayı 1, 299-320, 2008
  • [5] R. Radhakrishnan ve A. Kalaichelvi, “Selection of the best school fort he children- A decision making model using extent analysis method on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science Engineering and Technology, Cilt 3(5), 12334-12344, 2014.
  • [6] Y. Cerit, K. Yıldız ve N. Akgün, “Üniversite seçiminde etkili olan faktörlere ilişkin eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin görüşleri”, Milli Eğitim Dergisi, Sayı 173, 314-330, 2007.
  • [7] A. Göksu ve İ. Güngör, “Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses ve Üniversite Tercih Sıralamasında Uygulanması”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 13(3), 1-26, 2008.
  • [8] L. Zadeh, “Fuzzy Sets”, Information and Control, Cilt 8(3), 199-249, 1965.
  • [9] V. Torra, “Hesitant Fuzzy Sets”, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, Cilt 25 (6), 529-539, 2010.
  • [10] Rodriguez, R.M., Martinez, L. ve Herrera, F. “Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Cilt 20(1), 109-119, 2012.
  • [11] H. Liu ve R.M. Rodriguez, “A fuzzy envelope for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application to multi-criteria decision making”, Information Sciences, Cilt 258, 220–238, 2014.
  • [12] Z. Xu ve H. Liao, “Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Cilt 22(4), 749-761, 2014.
  • [13] S. Cevik-Onar, B. Oztaysi ve C. Kahraman, “Strategic Decision Selection Using Hesitant Fuzzy TOPSIS and Interval Type-2 Fuzzy AHP: A Case Study”, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, Cilt 7(5), 1002-1021, 2014.
  • [14] W. Zhou, Z. Xu, M. Chen, “Preference relations based on hesitant-intuitionistic fuzzy information and their application in group decision making”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 87, 163-175, 2015.
  • [15] J. Hu, K. Xiao, X. Chen, Y. Liu, “Interval type-2 hesitant fuzzy set and its application in multi-criteria decision making”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 87, 91-103, 2015.
  • [16] M. Yavuz, B. Öztaysi, S. Cevik- Onar, ve C. Kahraman, “Multi-criteria Evaluation of Alternative Fuel Vehicles via a Hierarchical Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Model”, Expert Systems with Applications, Cilt 42 (5), 2835-2848, 2015.
  • [17] B. Öztayşi, S. Çevik-Onar, E. Boltürk, C. Kahraman, “Hesitant Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process”, IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Istanbul, 2015.
  • [18] C.L. Hwang, ve K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications: A State of the Art Survey, USA: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
  • [19] S.J. Chen, C.L. Hwang Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, ISBN: 978-3-540-54998-7, 1992.
  • [20] S. Nadaban, S. Dzitac ve I. Dzitac, “ Fuzzy TOPSIS”, Procedia Computer Science, Cilt 91, 823-831, 2016.
  • [21] M.B. Ayhan, “Fuzzy TOPSIS Application for Supplier Selection Problem”, International Journal of Information, Business and Management, Cilt 5(2), 159-174, 2013
  • [22] Y. Şahin ve A.A. Supçiller, “Tedarikçi Seçimi İçin Bir Karar Desterk Sistemi”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, Cilt 3(2), 91-104, 2015.
  • [23] Ö. Uygun ve A. Dede, “Performance Evaluation of Green Supply Chain Management Using Integrated Fuzzy Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 102, 502-511, 2016.
  • [24] V. Agrawal, V.Tripathi ve N. Seth, "B-School Selection by Fuzzy TOPSIS and AHP." Innovative Solutions for Implementing Global Supply Chains in Emerging Markets, ed. Ashish Dwivedi, Hershey, PA., 1-27 (2016), doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9795-9.ch001
  • [25] S-W. Chou ve Y-C. Chang, “The implementation factors that influence the ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) Benefits”, Dec ision Support Systems, 46(1), 149-157, 2008.
  • [26] R.M.Rodriguez, L. Martinez, ve F. Herrera, “A Group Decision Making Model Dealing with Comparative Linguistic Expressions Based on Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets”, Information Sciences, Cilt 241, 28-42, 2013.
  • [27] S. Kır, H.R. Yazgan, B.Y. Erolan, G. Erbaş ve B. Altuntaş, “Kümeleme Yöntemi İle Oluşturulan İmalat Hücrelerinin Performanslarının Benzetim ve TOPSIS İle Değerlendirilmesi”, Sakarya Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 3, 267-282, 2015.
  • [28] Ö. Uygun, T.C. Kahveci, H. Taşkın, B. Priştine, “Readiness Assessment Model for Institutionalization of SMEs Using Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Techniques”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 88, 217-228, 2015.
  • [29] G. Büyüközkan, O. Feyzioğlu ve O. Nebol, “Selection of the strategic alliance partner in logistics value chain”, International Journal of Production Economics, Cilt 113(1), 148-158, 2008.
  • [30] M.B. Ayhan “A Fuzzy AHP Approach For Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study In A Gearmotor Company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains, Cilt.4(3), 11-23, 2013.
  • [31] M.B. Ayhan ve H.S. Kılıç “A Two Stage Approach for Supplier Selection Problem in Multi-Item/Multi-Supplier Environment with Quantity Discounts”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 85, 1-12, 2015.
  • [32] J.J. Buckley, “Fuzzy hierarchical analysis”, Fuzzy Sets Systems, Cilt 17(1), 233–247, 1985.

An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2, 269 - 284, 01.04.2018
https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.306664

Öz

Summer sport schools have been gaining an
importance especially for the children attending to primary or secondary
schools in summer seasons. By these summer schools, the children can both have
entertainment and learn new things. Due to the increasing demands for them, the
number of summer sport schools has increased. Hence, selecting the best summer
school has become a decision making problem. Therefore, in this paper, an
analytical solution was proposed for this new problem. In the proposed
approach, Hesitant Fuzzy AHP (HF-AHP), which is frequently used in literature in
recent times, was used as integrated with TOPSIS. In the case study part of
this proposed model, the importance weights of 4 main and 15 sub-criteria were
determined via HF-AHP. The best summer sport school was selected among the 3
alternatives by using TOPSIS method. Furthermore, by performing sensitivity
analysis, the effects of changes in criteria weights on the decision were
investigated. 

Kaynakça

  • [1] S. Duygulu, «TavsiyeEdiyorum.com» [Çevrimiçi]. Erişim Adresi: http://www.tavsiyeediyorum.com/makale_7038.htm. [Son Erişim:10 Ocak 2017]
  • [2] A. Güreş, «Aydindenge.com» [Çevrimiçi]. Erişim Adresi: http://www.aydindenge.com.tr/yazi/yrd-doc-dr-ali-gures/08/06/2013/yaz-spor-okullari. [Son Erişim:10 Nisan 2017]
  • [3] C. Polat ve Ö. Çelmeli, “Okul Öncesi Eğitim Kurumu Seçiminde Tüketici Tercih Etkenleri”, Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı 8, 144-166, 2015.
  • [4] Ü.H. Özden, “Analitik Hiyerarşi yöntemi ile ilkokul seçimi”, Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, CİLT XXIV, Sayı 1, 299-320, 2008
  • [5] R. Radhakrishnan ve A. Kalaichelvi, “Selection of the best school fort he children- A decision making model using extent analysis method on fuzzy analytic hierarchy process”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science Engineering and Technology, Cilt 3(5), 12334-12344, 2014.
  • [6] Y. Cerit, K. Yıldız ve N. Akgün, “Üniversite seçiminde etkili olan faktörlere ilişkin eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin görüşleri”, Milli Eğitim Dergisi, Sayı 173, 314-330, 2007.
  • [7] A. Göksu ve İ. Güngör, “Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses ve Üniversite Tercih Sıralamasında Uygulanması”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 13(3), 1-26, 2008.
  • [8] L. Zadeh, “Fuzzy Sets”, Information and Control, Cilt 8(3), 199-249, 1965.
  • [9] V. Torra, “Hesitant Fuzzy Sets”, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, Cilt 25 (6), 529-539, 2010.
  • [10] Rodriguez, R.M., Martinez, L. ve Herrera, F. “Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets for Decision Making”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Cilt 20(1), 109-119, 2012.
  • [11] H. Liu ve R.M. Rodriguez, “A fuzzy envelope for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term set and its application to multi-criteria decision making”, Information Sciences, Cilt 258, 220–238, 2014.
  • [12] Z. Xu ve H. Liao, “Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Cilt 22(4), 749-761, 2014.
  • [13] S. Cevik-Onar, B. Oztaysi ve C. Kahraman, “Strategic Decision Selection Using Hesitant Fuzzy TOPSIS and Interval Type-2 Fuzzy AHP: A Case Study”, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, Cilt 7(5), 1002-1021, 2014.
  • [14] W. Zhou, Z. Xu, M. Chen, “Preference relations based on hesitant-intuitionistic fuzzy information and their application in group decision making”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 87, 163-175, 2015.
  • [15] J. Hu, K. Xiao, X. Chen, Y. Liu, “Interval type-2 hesitant fuzzy set and its application in multi-criteria decision making”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 87, 91-103, 2015.
  • [16] M. Yavuz, B. Öztaysi, S. Cevik- Onar, ve C. Kahraman, “Multi-criteria Evaluation of Alternative Fuel Vehicles via a Hierarchical Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Model”, Expert Systems with Applications, Cilt 42 (5), 2835-2848, 2015.
  • [17] B. Öztayşi, S. Çevik-Onar, E. Boltürk, C. Kahraman, “Hesitant Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process”, IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, Istanbul, 2015.
  • [18] C.L. Hwang, ve K. Yoon, Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications: A State of the Art Survey, USA: Springer-Verlag, 1981.
  • [19] S.J. Chen, C.L. Hwang Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, ISBN: 978-3-540-54998-7, 1992.
  • [20] S. Nadaban, S. Dzitac ve I. Dzitac, “ Fuzzy TOPSIS”, Procedia Computer Science, Cilt 91, 823-831, 2016.
  • [21] M.B. Ayhan, “Fuzzy TOPSIS Application for Supplier Selection Problem”, International Journal of Information, Business and Management, Cilt 5(2), 159-174, 2013
  • [22] Y. Şahin ve A.A. Supçiller, “Tedarikçi Seçimi İçin Bir Karar Desterk Sistemi”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, Cilt 3(2), 91-104, 2015.
  • [23] Ö. Uygun ve A. Dede, “Performance Evaluation of Green Supply Chain Management Using Integrated Fuzzy Multi Criteria Decision Making Techniques”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 102, 502-511, 2016.
  • [24] V. Agrawal, V.Tripathi ve N. Seth, "B-School Selection by Fuzzy TOPSIS and AHP." Innovative Solutions for Implementing Global Supply Chains in Emerging Markets, ed. Ashish Dwivedi, Hershey, PA., 1-27 (2016), doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9795-9.ch001
  • [25] S-W. Chou ve Y-C. Chang, “The implementation factors that influence the ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) Benefits”, Dec ision Support Systems, 46(1), 149-157, 2008.
  • [26] R.M.Rodriguez, L. Martinez, ve F. Herrera, “A Group Decision Making Model Dealing with Comparative Linguistic Expressions Based on Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets”, Information Sciences, Cilt 241, 28-42, 2013.
  • [27] S. Kır, H.R. Yazgan, B.Y. Erolan, G. Erbaş ve B. Altuntaş, “Kümeleme Yöntemi İle Oluşturulan İmalat Hücrelerinin Performanslarının Benzetim ve TOPSIS İle Değerlendirilmesi”, Sakarya Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 3, 267-282, 2015.
  • [28] Ö. Uygun, T.C. Kahveci, H. Taşkın, B. Priştine, “Readiness Assessment Model for Institutionalization of SMEs Using Fuzzy Hybrid MCDM Techniques”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 88, 217-228, 2015.
  • [29] G. Büyüközkan, O. Feyzioğlu ve O. Nebol, “Selection of the strategic alliance partner in logistics value chain”, International Journal of Production Economics, Cilt 113(1), 148-158, 2008.
  • [30] M.B. Ayhan “A Fuzzy AHP Approach For Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study In A Gearmotor Company. International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains, Cilt.4(3), 11-23, 2013.
  • [31] M.B. Ayhan ve H.S. Kılıç “A Two Stage Approach for Supplier Selection Problem in Multi-Item/Multi-Supplier Environment with Quantity Discounts”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Cilt 85, 1-12, 2015.
  • [32] J.J. Buckley, “Fuzzy hierarchical analysis”, Fuzzy Sets Systems, Cilt 17(1), 233–247, 1985.
Toplam 32 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Konular Endüstri Mühendisliği
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Mustafa Batuhan Ayhan

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Nisan 2018
Gönderilme Tarihi 17 Nisan 2017
Kabul Tarihi 13 Kasım 2017
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2018 Cilt: 22 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Ayhan, M. B. (2018). An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School. Sakarya University Journal of Science, 22(2), 269-284. https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.306664
AMA Ayhan MB. An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School. SAUJS. Nisan 2018;22(2):269-284. doi:10.16984/saufenbilder.306664
Chicago Ayhan, Mustafa Batuhan. “An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School”. Sakarya University Journal of Science 22, sy. 2 (Nisan 2018): 269-84. https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.306664.
EndNote Ayhan MB (01 Nisan 2018) An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School. Sakarya University Journal of Science 22 2 269–284.
IEEE M. B. Ayhan, “An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School”, SAUJS, c. 22, sy. 2, ss. 269–284, 2018, doi: 10.16984/saufenbilder.306664.
ISNAD Ayhan, Mustafa Batuhan. “An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School”. Sakarya University Journal of Science 22/2 (Nisan 2018), 269-284. https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.306664.
JAMA Ayhan MB. An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School. SAUJS. 2018;22:269–284.
MLA Ayhan, Mustafa Batuhan. “An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School”. Sakarya University Journal of Science, c. 22, sy. 2, 2018, ss. 269-84, doi:10.16984/saufenbilder.306664.
Vancouver Ayhan MB. An Integrated Hesitant Fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS Approach for Selecting Summer Sport School. SAUJS. 2018;22(2):269-84.

30930 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.