KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research (대한토목학회논문집)

Korean Society of Civil Engeneers (대한토목학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making Techniques for Robust Prioritization

로버스트 우선순위 결정을 위한 Fuzzy 다기준 의사결정기법의 적용

  • 한봉구 (서울과학기술대학교 건설시스템디자인공학과) ;
  • 정은성 (서울과학기술대학교 건설시스템디자인공학과)
  • Received : 2012.07.07
  • Accepted : 2013.04.04
  • Published : 2013.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study presents the feasibility of fuzzy multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques for the robust prioritization of projects. It is applied to water resources planning problem. Results from weighted sum method (WSM), analytic hierarchy process (AHP), revised analytic hierarchy process (R-AHP), and TOPSIS are compared with those from Fuzzy WSM, Fuzzy, AHP, Fuzzy R-AHP, and Fuzzy TOPSIS. For the calculation, all weights on criteria and the normalized data were obtained from the same investigation. As a result, the rankings from four MCDM techniques are slightly different while those from fuzzy MCDM show the comparatively consistent ranking. Therefore, it is desirable to use fuzzy MCDM technique when MCDM is used for the prioritization problem, since fuzzy MCDM can include the uncertain variability of input data and weighting values on criteria.

본 연구는 로버스트 우선순위 결정을 위한 퍼지 다기준 의사결정기법의 타당성을 수자원 계획수립 문제에 적용하여 제시하였다. 즉 일반적인 다기준 의사결정 기법인 가중합계법, 계층화분석과정, 수정계층화분석과정, TOPSIS 방법과 퍼지가중합계법, 퍼지계층화분석과정, 퍼지수정계층화분석과정, 퍼지 TOPSIS 방법을 사용하여 결과를 비교하였다. 이때 사용된 각 평가기준별 자료는 동일하게 표준화되었으며 각 가중치도 동일한 방법으로 결정되었다. 분석결과 다기준 의사결정방법에 따라 조금씩 다른 순위가 도출되었으나, 퍼지 다기준 의사결정기법을 사용할 경우 사업들의 순위 변동성이 퍼지를 사용하지 않을 때보다 크지 않아 보다 일관된 순위를 유도하였다. 따라서 사업의 우선순위를 결정하는 문제에서 자료와 가중치의 불확실성을 고려할 수 있는 퍼지 다기준 의사결정기법을 활용해서 방법의 변화로 인한 순위의 변동성을 최소화해서 로버스트 순위를 결정하는 것이 보다 효과적이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Afshar, A., Marino, M. A., Saadatpour, M., and Afshar, A. (2011). "Fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis applied to Karun reservoirs system." Water Resources Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 545-563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9713-x
  2. Alipour, M. H., Shamsai, A., and Ahmady, N. (2010). "A new fuzzy multicriteria decision making method and its application in diversion of water." Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 37, pp. 8809-8813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.06.023
  3. Ashitian, B., Haghighirad, F., Makui, A., and Montazer, GA. (2009). "Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based on interval-valued fuzzy sets." Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 9, pp. 457-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2008.05.005
  4. Bardossy, A., and Bogardi, I. (1983). "Network design for the spatial estimation of environmental variables." Applied Mathematics and Computation, Vol. 12, pp. 339-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/0096-3003(83)90046-2
  5. Belton, V., and Gear, T. (1983). "On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies." Omega, pp. 228-230.
  6. Chung, E. S., Hong, W. P., Lee, K. S., Burian, S. (2011). "Integrated use of a continuous simulation model and multi-attribute decision making for ranking urban watershed management alternatives." Water Resources Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 641-659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9718-5
  7. Chung, E. S., Kong, K. S., Lee, K. S., Yoo, J. C. (2008b). "Evaluation of alternative benefit using choice experiment methid and alternative evaluation index." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 101-113 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2008.41.1.101
  8. Chung, E. S., Lee, K. S., Park, K. S. (2008a). "Development of alternative evaluation index using multicriteria decision making techniques." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 87-100 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2008.41.1.087
  9. Elshorbagy, A. (2006). "Multicriterion decision analysis approach to assess the utility of watershed modeling for management decisions." Water Resources Research, Vol. 42, W9407.
  10. Farajzadeh, M., Ahadnezhad, M., and Amini, J. (2011). "The vulnerability assessment of urban housing in earthquake against (A case study: 9th district of Tehran municipality)." Urban- Regional Studies and Research Journal, Vol. 3, No. 9, pp. 19-36.
  11. Ganoulis, J. (2003). "Evaluating alternative strategies for wastewater recycling and reuse in the mediterranean area." Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 11-19.
  12. Gupta, A. P., Harboe, R., and Tabucanon, M. T. (2000). "Fuzzy multiple-criteria decision making for crop area planning in Narmada river basin." Agricultural Systems, Vol. 64, pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(00)00005-6
  13. Hajkowicz, S., and Collins, K. (2007). "A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management." Water Resources Management, Vol. 21, No. 9, pp. 1553-1566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-9112-5
  14. Hwang, C. L., and Yoon, K. S. (1981). Multiple attribute decisionmaking: Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg.
  15. Kaya, T., and Kahraman, C. (2011). "Fuzzy multiple criteria forestry decision making based on an integrated VIKOR and AHP approach." Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, No. 6, pp. 7326-7333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.12.003
  16. Kim, W. G., Lee, G. M., Park. D. H. (2006). "Investment ranking decision using MCDA in dam projects." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 39, No. 12, pp. 1067-1080 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2006.39.12.1067
  17. Kim, Y. K, Chung, E. S, and Lee, K. S. (2012). "Fuzzy TOPSIS approach to flood vulnerability assessment in Korea." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 45, No. 9, pp. 901-913 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.3741/JKWRA.2012.45.9.901
  18. Ko, S. K., Lee, K. M., Ko, I. H. (1992). "Comparative evaluation of multipurpose reservoir operating rules using multicriterion decision analysis techniques." Journal of Korea Water Resources Association, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 83-92 (in Korean).
  19. Krohling, R. A., and Campanharo, V. C. (2011). "Fuzzy TOPSIS for group decision making: A Case Study for Accidents with Oil Spill in the Sea." Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, pp. 4190-4197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.09.081
  20. Levy, J. K., Hartmann, J., Li, K. W., An, Y., and Asgary, A. (2007). "Multi-criteria decision support systems for flood hazard mitigation and emergency response in urban watersheds." Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Vol. 43, No. 2, 346-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00027.x
  21. Lim, K., and Lee D. R. (2009). The spatial MCDA approach for evaluating flood damage reduction alternatives. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 359-369 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-009-0359-2
  22. Mamdani, E. H., and Assilian, S. (1975). "An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller." International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(75)80002-2
  23. Markropoulos, C. K., and Butler, D. (2006). "Spatial ordered weighted averaging: Incorporating Spatially Variable Attitude Towards Risk in Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Making." Environmental Modelling and Software, Vol. 21, pp. 69-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2004.10.010
  24. Raj, P. A., and Kumar, D. N. (1998). "Ranking multi-criterion river basin planning alternatives using fuzzy numbers." Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 100, pp. 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(97)00091-2
  25. Raju, K. S., Duckstein, L., and Arondel, C. (2000). "Multicriterion analysis for sustainable water resources planning: A Case Study in Spain." Water Resources Management, Vol. 14, pp. 435-456. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011120513259
  26. Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA.
  27. SoltanPanah, H., Farughi, H., and Heshami, S. (2011). "Ranking repair and maintenance projects of large bridges in Kurdestan province using fuzzy TOPSIS method." Journal of American Science, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp. 227-223.
  28. Srdjevic, B., Medeiros, Y. D. P., and Faria, A. S. (2004). "An objective multi-criteria evaluation of water management scenarios." Water Resources Management, Vol. 18, pp. 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:WARM.0000015348.88832.52
  29. Yazdani, M., Alidoosti, A., and Basiri, M. H. (2012). "Risk analysis for critical infrastructures using fuzzy topsis." Journal of Management Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 1-19.
  30. Yi, C. S., Choi, S. A., Shim, M. P., Kim, H. S. (2005). "Multi-criteria decision making model for flood control project 2. selection of most preferable alternative and determination of investment priorities." KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, No. 5B, pp. 347-354 (in Korean).
  31. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). "Fuzzy sets." Information and Control, Vol. 8, pp. 338-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
  32. Zardari, N. H., Cordery, I., and Sharma, A. (2010). "An objective multiattribute analysis approach for allocation of scarce irrigation water resources." Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp. 412-428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2009.00410.x
  33. Zhao, R., and Govind, R. (1991). Algebraic characteristics of extended fuzzy number, Information Science, 54, pp. 103-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0255(91)90047-X

Cited by

  1. UI proposal using modified diamond pairwise comparison diagram for fuzzy integral-based GIS–MCDM vol.24, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41324-016-0031-0