scholarly journals An Integrated Decision Support Model for Evaluating Public Transport Quality

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarbast Moslem ◽  
Ahmad Alkharabsheh ◽  
Karzan Ismael ◽  
Szabolcs Duleba
Keyword(s):  
Public Transport ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Urban Bus ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Bus Transport ◽  
Best Worst Method

Big cities suffer from serious complex problems such as air pollution, congestion, and traffic accidents. Developing public transport quality in such cities is considered an efficient remedy to obviate these critical issues. This paper aims to determine the significant supply quality criteria of public transportation. As a methodology, a hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) combined with the Best Worst Method (BWM) is applied. The proposed model is basically a hierarchy structure with at least a 5 × 5 pairwise comparison matrix or larger. A real-world complex problem was examined to validate the created model (public transport quality improvement). An urban bus transport system in the Jordanian capital city, Amman, was used as a case study; three stakeholder groups (passengers, nonpassengers, and representatives of the local government) participated in the evaluation process. The conventional Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) leads to weak consistency in the case of existing 5 × 5 pairwise comparison matrices or larger, particularly in estimating complex problems. To avoid this critical issue in AHP, we used Best Worst Method (BWM) comparisons, which make the evaluation process easier for decision makers; moreover, it saves survey time and provides more consistency when compared to AHP pairwise comparisons. The model adopted highlighted the most significant service quality criteria that influence urban bus transport systems. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis conducted detected the stability of the criteria ranking in the three levels of the hierarchical structure. Since the proposed AHP–BWM model (which is the sole example of this sort of combination) is independent from the decision attributes, it can be applied to arbitrary hierarchically structured decision problems with a relatively large number of pairwise comparisons.

scholarly journals A New Model for Determining Weight Coefficients of Criteria in MCDM Models: Full Consistency Method (FUCOM)

Symmetry ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dragan Pamučar ◽  
Željko Stević ◽  
Siniša Sremac
Keyword(s):  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Optimal Values ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Consistency Method ◽  
Weight Coefficients ◽  
Best Worst Method

In this paper, a new multi-criteria problem solving method—the Full Consistency Method (FUCOM)—is proposed. The model implies the definition of two groups of constraints that need to satisfy the optimal values of weight coefficients. The first group of constraints is the condition that the relations of the weight coefficients of criteria should be equal to the comparative priorities of the criteria. The second group of constraints is defined on the basis of the conditions of mathematical transitivity. After defining the constraints and solving the model, in addition to optimal weight values, a deviation from full consistency (DFC) is obtained. The degree of DFC is the deviation value of the obtained weight coefficients from the estimated comparative priorities of the criteria. In addition, DFC is also the reliability confirmation of the obtained weights of criteria. In order to illustrate the proposed model and evaluate its performance, FUCOM was tested on several numerical examples from the literature. The model validation was performed by comparing it with the other subjective models (the Best Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)), based on the pairwise comparisons of the criteria and the validation of the results by using DFC. The results show that FUCOM provides better results than the BWM and AHP methods, when the relation between consistency and the required number of the comparisons of the criteria are taken into consideration. The main advantages of FUCOM in relation to the existing multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods are as follows: (1) a significantly smaller number of pairwise comparisons (only n − 1), (2) a consistent pairwise comparison of criteria, and (3) the calculation of the reliable values of criteria weight coefficients, which contribute to rational judgment.

scholarly journals Fusion of BWM and AHP MCDM Methods to Choose the Most Suitable Secondary School for an Individual in the Context of Bangladesh

2019 ◽  
Vol 06 (03) ◽  
pp. 311-328
Author(s):  
N. S. M. Rezaur Rahman ◽  
Md. Abdul Ahad Chowdhury ◽  
Adnan Firoze ◽  
Rashedur M. Rahman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Secondary School ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
User Preferences ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Final Score ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Best Worst Method

Choosing the best schools from a group of schools is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. In this paper, we have represented a method that uses the fusion of two multi-criteria decision-making methods, Best–Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), to rank some of the user preferred alternatives. The system considers the choice of the user and the quality of the alternatives to rank them. User preferences on the criteria are taken as inputs in the form of best–worst comparison vectors to measure the choice of the user. These values are applied to calculate the numeric weights of each of the criteria. These weights reflect the preference of the user. A dataset of secondary schools in Bangladesh has been compiled and used for automatic quantitative pairwise comparison on the alternatives to calculate the score of each alternative in every criterion, which reflects its quality in that criterion. These scores are calculated using AHP. The weights of the criteria as well as the scores of these alternatives in those criteria are then used to calculate the final score of the alternatives and to rank them accordingly. An extensive experimental analysis and comparative study is reported at the end of this paper.

FARSJUM, A FUZZY SYSTEM FOR RANKING SPARSE JUDGMENT MATRICES: A CASE STUDY IN SOCCER TOURNAMENTS

2007 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 115-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. GHOLAMIAN ◽  
S. M. T. FATEMI GHOMI ◽  
M. GHAZANFARI
Keyword(s):  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Major Constituent ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
World Cup ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Rank Reversal ◽  
Judgment Matrix ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The establishment of the priorities from pairwise comparison matrices is the major constituent of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). However, the number of pairwise comparisons necessary in real problems often becomes overwhelming. In such cases, generally the experts are not able to answer all questions and consequently sparse judgment matrix is generated which caused "equal ranks" and "rank reversal" based on AHP method. In this paper, a new ranking system (FARSJUM) is developed for such sparse judgment matrix. The system is constructed on fuzzy rules and fuzzy reasoning methods. The numerical example of world cup soccer tournament is brought to clarify the performance of the developed system comparing with AHP method in ranking the sparse judgment matrices.

scholarly journals A Model for Determining Weight Coefficients by Forming a Non-Decreasing Series at Criteria Significance Levels (NDSL)

Mathematics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 745
Author(s):  
Mališa Žižović ◽  
Dragan Pamučar ◽  
Goran Ćirović ◽  
Miodrag M. Žižović ◽  
Boža D. Miljković
Keyword(s):  
Decision Makers ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Small Range ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Original Algorithm ◽  
Real World Problem ◽  
Significance Levels ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Weight Coefficients ◽  
Best Worst Method

In this paper, a new method for determining weight coefficients by forming a non-decreasing series at criteria significance levels (the NDSL method) is presented. The NDLS method includes the identification of the best criterion (i.e., the most significant and most influential criterion) and the ranking of criteria in a decreasing series from the most significant to the least significant criterion. Criteria are then grouped as per the levels of significance within the framework of which experts express their preferences in compliance with the significance of such criteria. By employing this procedure, fully consistent results are obtained. In this paper, the advantages of the NDSL model are singled out through a comparison with the Best Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) models. The advantages include the following: (1) the NDSL model requires a significantly smaller number of pairwise comparisons of criteria, only involving an n − 1 comparison, whereas the AHP requires an n(n − 1)/2 comparison and the BWM a 2n − 3 comparison; (2) it enables us to obtain reliable (consistent) results, even in the case of a larger number of criteria (more than nine criteria); (3) the NDSL model applies an original algorithm for grouping criteria according to the levels of significance, through which the deficiencies of the 9-degree scale applied in the BWM and AHP models are eliminated. By doing so, the small range and inconsistency of the 9-degree scale are eliminated; (4) while the BWM includes the defining of one unique best/worst criterion, the NDSL model eliminates this limitation and gives decision-makers the freedom to express the relationships between criteria in accordance with their preferences. In order to demonstrate the performance of the developed model, it was tested on a real-world problem and the results were validated through a comparison with the BWM and AHP models.

scholarly journals A Study of using AHP Method to Evaluate the Criteria and Attribute of Defects in Heritage Building

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
pp. 01002
Author(s):  
Siti Nor Fatimah Zuraidi ◽  
Mohammad Ashraf Abdul Rahman ◽  
Zainal Abidin Akasah
Keyword(s):  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Building Performance ◽  
Survey Questionnaire ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Pairwise Comparison Matrix ◽  
Heritage Building ◽  
Element Type ◽  
Hierarchy Process

This paper examines the criteria and attributes for assessing defects in a heritage building. The goal of this paper is to solve element type for building defects by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). A survey questionnaire was develop based on the identified criteria and attributes of defect for a heritage building in Malaysia. The survey questionnaire was administered to consultants, academics, and contractors. A total of 20 expert panels was selected to determine the element of the defect in building performance. The sensitivity analysis of alternative ratings in respect to difference pairwise comparisons of the criteria and attribute was carried out. By changing one element in the pairwise comparison matrix, the process of defect element is monitored thus enabling possible improvements. An overall ranking of the Hierarchy priorities of criteria and attribute was a result of the AHP analysis. The result of the research is weightage for each criterion and its respective attributes. The criteria and attributes will be used as elements to develop a strategic heritage building performance procedure in Malaysia.

scholarly journals User Satisfaction Survey on Public Transport by a New PAHP Based Model

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (21) ◽  
pp. 10256
Author(s):  
Szabolcs Duleba ◽  
Sarbast Moslem
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Public Transport ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Sample Survey ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Public Transport System ◽  
Time Investment ◽  
Passenger Satisfaction ◽  
Hierarchy Process

There is an obvious trade-off between information obtained from passenger surveys and cost and time investment. This paper offers a new approach for this problem and its detailed step-by-step procedure description. Parsimonious Analytic Hierarchy Process (PAHP) is a recently created methodology that combines the simplicity of direct evaluations with the consistency and reliability of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). In the paper, the first large sample survey of passenger satisfaction by a new, PAHP-based model and procedure is presented as a case study. Moreover, a comparison with an AHP survey on the same public transport system and the same pattern are demonstrated. Since the comparative analysis produced a strong correlation between AHP and PAHP outcomes, it can be stated that the new procedure is less time consuming and costly than the AHP, while possessing the same benefits, and thus, it is more trustworthy than satisfaction measured by direct evaluations. Consequently, our proposed model can be applied both in theoretical and practical cases. Theoretically, it solves the problem of avoiding the use of large pairwise comparison matrices, and practically, it is a useful support to public satisfaction surveys, especially in the transportation sector.

scholarly journals Evaluating Passenger Demand for Development of the Urban Transport System by an AHP Model with the Real-World Application of Amman

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (22) ◽  
pp. 4759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad Alkharabsheh ◽  
Sarbast Moslem ◽  
Szabolcs Duleba
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Transport System ◽  
Public Transport ◽  
Market Competition ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Urban Transport ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The demand for a service includes generally two major components; quality elements and the reasonable and affordable price. Public transport can be considered as a special service, there is no direct market competition for the provider, but the use of private transport modes substitutes the usage of public vehicles. The dominating competitor, the usage of private cars, causes higher CO2 emission and has a serious impact on the environment. Thus, it is important to analyze from market and sustainability point of view which are the preferences of the public for the improvement of the urban transport system. This paper aims to conduct this analysis by including quality criteria and transport fare criteria related to the current service of a city and by setting up and testing a generally applicable model for decision support. Since the acquisition of public preference was the primary objective, and the problem can be considered as decision making, the Analytic Hierarchy Process was selected as methodology. There are previous research results of applying this method on public transport, however, not in an integrated model, in which quality and cost considerations are pairwise compared. Thus, the conventional Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique was used and the well-proven requisites of consistency and sensitivity check were analyzed. The new model was tested in a case study: surveying the public transport demand in the capital of Jordan, Amman.

DETERMINING THE DESALINATION UNIT COMPOSITION FOR COSTAL AREAS AND SMALL ISLANDS USE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imam Setiadi ◽  
Dinda Rita K. Hartaja
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Small Islands ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Comparison Research ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Selection Of

Selection of the appropriate composition desalination units can be done with a variety of method approaches, one of the method is the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In determining the desalination unit with AHP method to consider is setting a goal, an alternative criteria and pairwise comparison. Research for the determination of the exact composition of the desalination unit in order to achieve sustainable drinking water suppy in coastal areas and small islands has been conducted. The results of the study are as follows, the energy demand of 50.83%, operator costs of 26.64%, maintenance costs of 14.13% and chemical requirement 8.4%. For an alternative composition desalination unit of RO 10 m3 / day is the best alternative composition with value of 59.61%, the composition of the next alternative is RO 20 m3/ day of 30.40% and the last alternative of the desalination unit composition is RO 120 m3/ day of 09.99%.Key words : Desalination, Mukti Stage Flash Composition, AHP

On Moderate Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Pairwise Comparison Model With Subcriteria

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
G. Marimuthu ◽  
G. Ramesh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Fuzzy Ahp ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Decision Models ◽  
Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Comparison Model ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Decisions usually involve the getting the best solution, selecting the suitable experiments, most appropriate judgments, taking the quality results etc., using some techniques.  Every decision making can be considered as the choice from the set of alternatives based on a set of criteria.  The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is a multi-criteria decision making and is dealing with decision making problems through pairwise comparisons mode [10].  The weight vectors from this comparison model are obtained by using extent analysis method.  This paper concern with an alternate method of finding the weight vectors from the original fuzzy AHP decision model (moderate fuzzy AHP model), that has the same rank as obtained in original fuzzy AHP and ideal fuzzy AHP decision models.

JUDGMENT NUMBER REDUCTION: AN ISSUE IN THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

2010 ◽  
Vol 09 (01) ◽  
pp. 175-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
LONG-TING WU ◽  
XIA CUI ◽  
RU-WEI DAI
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Random Variable ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Priority Vector ◽  
Judgment Error ◽  
Scale Error ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) uses pairwise comparison to evaluate alternatives' advantages to a certain criterion. For decision-making problem with many different criteria and alternatives, pairwise comparison causes a prolonged decision-making period and rises fatigue in decision-makers' mentality. A question of practical value is if there exists a way to reduce judgment number and what influence the reduction will have on the overall evaluation of alternative ratings. To answer this question, we introduce scale error and judgment error into AHP judgment matrix. By expanding the scales defined in the AHP, scale error is eliminated. Taking judgment error as random variable, a new estimator to calculate priority vector is presented. In the end, an example is proved to show lowering judgment number will increase the probability of larger errors appearing in priority vector computation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document