Route planning for hazardous materials transportation: Multi-criteria decision-making approach

被引:3
|
作者
Noureddine M. [1 ]
Ristic M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Faculty of science and technology, University of Djelfa, Djelfa
[2] University of defence in Belgrade, Department of logistics, Belgrade
关键词
FUCOM; Hazardous Materials Routing; MABAC; Multi-criteria Decision-making; TOPSIS;
D O I
10.31181/dmame1901066n
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Transport of hazardous material (THM) represents a complex area involving a large number of participants. The imperative of THM is minimization of risks in the entire process of transportation from the aspect of everyone involved in it, which is not an easy task at all. To achieve this, it is necessary in its early phase to carry out adequate evaluation and selection of an optimal transport route. In this paper, optimal route criteria for THM are selected using a new approach in the field of multi-criteria decision-making. Weight coefficients of these criteria were determined by applying the Full Consistency Method (FUCOM). Evaluation and selection of hazardous material routes is determined by applying the TOPSIS (Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) and the MABAC (Multi-attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison) methods. In order to establish the stability of models and validate the results obtained from the FUCOM-TOPSIS-MABAC model, a sensitivity analysis (of ten different scenarios) was performed. The sensitivity analysis implied changes of the weight coefficients criteria with respect to their original value. The proposed route model was tested on the real example of the transport Eurodiesel in Serbia. © 2018 Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:66 / 85
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] CONSIDERING INTERACTIONS IN MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING
    Cancer, Vesna
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 10TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOR 09, 2009, : 151 - 156
  • [32] Handling veracity in multi-criteria decision-making: A multi-dimensional approach
    De Tre, Guy
    De Mol, Robin
    Bronselaer, Antoon
    INFORMATION SCIENCES, 2018, 460 : 541 - 554
  • [33] When is a Decision-Making Method Trustworthy? Criteria for Evaluating Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods
    Saaty, Thomas L.
    Ergu, Daji
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2015, 14 (06) : 1171 - 1187
  • [34] An Alternative Ranking Approach and Its Usage in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making
    Industrial Engineering Department, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Maçka, Besiktas
    34367, Turkey
    不详
    34357, Turkey
    Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst., 2009, 3 (219-235): : 219 - 235
  • [35] Prioritizing astronaut traverses on the Moon: A multi-criteria decision-making approach
    Miguel Sanchez-Lozano, Juan
    Pena-Asensio, Eloy
    Bickel, Valentin T.
    Kring, David A.
    ACTA ASTRONAUTICA, 2025, 229 : 77 - 89
  • [36] Supporting multi-criteria decision-making across websites: the Logikos approach
    Fernandez, Alejandro
    Zarate, Pascale
    Cruz Gardey, Juan
    Bosetti, Gabriela
    CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2021, 29 (01) : 201 - 225
  • [37] Application of multi-criteria decision-making approach in healthcare surgical management
    Gardas, Bhaskar B.
    Ghongade, Nilesh P.
    Jagtap, Annasaheb H.
    JOURNAL OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS, 2022, 29 (1-2) : 92 - 109
  • [38] A multi-criteria decision-making approach for geometric matching of areal objects
    Kim, Jiyoung
    Yu, Kiyun
    Bang, Yoonsik
    TRANSACTIONS IN GIS, 2018, 22 (01) : 269 - 287
  • [39] Multi-criteria group decision-making approach with linguistic assessment information
    School of Business, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
    Kongzhi yu Juece Control Decis, 2007, 5 (545-548+553):
  • [40] A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Ideal Business Location Identification
    Shaikh, Salman Ahmed
    Memon, Mohsin
    Kim, Kyoung-Sook
    APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL, 2021, 11 (11):