2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2015.09.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Application of AHP and ELECTRE III/IV Methods to Multiple Level, Multiple Criteria Evaluation of Urban Transportation Projects

Abstract: In this paper the authors carry out a multiple level, multiple criteria evaluation of 18 urban transportation projects. At each level of the hierarchical decision problem different multiple criteria ranking sub-problems have been structured and solved with the application of AHP method, ELECTRE III/IV method and their combination (AHP/ELECTRE III/IV). Thus, the computational phase allowed for testing the above mentioned multiple criteria ranking methods, i. e.: AHP and ELECTRE III/IV and analyzing their suitab… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…AHP can be applied to virtually any field, such as water supply [17] and environment management [18], among many others. Moreover, the literature [19,20] supports the integration of AHP with other MCDM techniques to make the final results more trustworthy. A straightforward application of AHP, as done in this paper, can easily weight the various factors involved in the calculation of the modified RPN.…”
Section: Multi-criteria Decision-making Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AHP can be applied to virtually any field, such as water supply [17] and environment management [18], among many others. Moreover, the literature [19,20] supports the integration of AHP with other MCDM techniques to make the final results more trustworthy. A straightforward application of AHP, as done in this paper, can easily weight the various factors involved in the calculation of the modified RPN.…”
Section: Multi-criteria Decision-making Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Usually, the result of a multi-objective optimization problem is a set of non-dominated solutions (in which no solution is better than all the others concerning all the objectives), from which the DM has to choose his/her preferred alternative. The task of selecting a preferred alternative is not trivial; therefore, multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods-automated methods for selecting a preferred solution from a set of solutions having conflicting criteria-have been developed [40,41].…”
Section: Multi-criteria Decision-makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Formally, a multi-criteria decision problem contains two sets: A-a set of actions or solutions, and F-a set of criteria, which is consistent with the DM's preferences and which can be used to evaluate set A. Moreover, no correlation exists between the various criteria domains, and the domains of all criteria are disjointed [40,42].…”
Section: Multi-criteria Decision-makingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third step: Ranking of provinces In this step, the proposed DEA model and the resultant constraints from previous step (FAHP) are merged and, thereby, the mathematical model is developed as follows: (22) w IC2 > w IC3 (23) w IC3 > w IC4 (24) w OC1 > w OC4 (25) w OC4 > w OC2 (26) w OC2 > w OC5 (27) w OC5 > w OC3 (28) By running the model in GAMS24.1/BARON software, the efficiency deviation of each province is calculated. The province with the lowest level of deviation benefits form higher efficiency.…”
Section: Second Step: Weighting Of Criteriamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Zak & Kruszynski [23] proposed an approach based on AHP and ELECTRE III/IV for the assessment of urban transportation projects. They applied the aforementioned approach for 18 projects where the results indicated the efficiency and user friendliness of their proposed approach.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%