nach oben

Soft Computing

Erschienen in:

19.05.2021 | Soft computing in decision making and in modeling in economics

An improved multi-criteria emergency decision-making method in environmental disasters

verfasst von: Guang-Jun Jiang, Hong-Xia Chen, Hong-Hua Sun, Mohammad Yazdi, Arman Nedjati, Kehinde Adewale Adesina

Erschienen in: Soft Computing | Ausgabe 15/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods deeply assist decision-makers in evaluating and analyzing input data as accurately as possible in the area of safety and reliability. The Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) can be used to rank a set of alternatives based on the different types of criteria. However, this method still needs to be improved; fuzzy set theory and its corresponding extensions are bold in the line of TOPSIS improvement. In this study, the original form of TOPSIS method is extended using Pythagorean fuzzy-based Chebyshev distance measures. Pythagorean fuzzy set has better reflection compared to the conventional fuzzy set theory and Chebyshev distance measures can provide more accurate results, which are used to compute the separation measures in the TOPSIS method. Therefore, the novel improved TOPSIS methods have been developed underlying the ideal of Pythagorean fuzzy-based Chebyshev distance measures. The developed method is applied on a humanitarian case-study to show the efficiency of the approach in an emergency response situation. Results show that the proposed method is efficiently applicable in real-life decision-making situations.

Vorheriger Artikel Selection Industry 4.0 maturity model using fuzzy and intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS methods for a solar cell manufacturing company

Nächster Artikel Supplier’s cooperation strategy with two competing manufacturers under wholesale price discount contract considering technology investment

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Abdel-Basset M, Mohamed R (2020) A novel plithogenic TOPSIS-CRITIC model for sustainable supply chain risk management. J Clean Prod 247:119586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119586CrossRef

Adesina KA, Nedjati A, Yazdi M (2020) A Short communication improving marine safety management system by addressing common safety program. Res Mar Sci 5:671–680

Al-Qerem A, Alauthman M, Almomani A, Gupta BB (2020) IoT transaction processing through cooperative concurrency control on fog–cloud computing environment. Soft Comput 24:5695–5711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-04220-yCrossRef

Alsmirat MA, Al-Alem F, Al-Ayyoub M, Jararweh Y, Gupta B (2019) Impact of digital fingerprint image quality on the fingerprint recognition accuracy. Multimed Tools Appl 78:3649–3688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-5537-5CrossRef

Andreopoulou Z, Koliouska C, Galariotis E, Zopounidis C (2018) Renewable energy sources: using PROMETHEE II for ranking websites to support market opportunities. Technol Forecast Soc Change 131:31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.06.007CrossRef

Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20:87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3CrossRefMATH

Behzadian M, Khanmohammadi Otaghsara S, Yazdani M, Ignatius J (2012) A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Syst Appl 39:13051–13069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.056CrossRef

Bian T, Zheng H, Yin L, Deng Y (2018) Failure mode and effects analysis based on D numbers and TOPSIS. Qual Reliab Eng Int 34:501–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2268CrossRef

Bolturk E (2018) Pythagorean fuzzy CODAS and its application to supplier selection in a manufacturing firm. J Enterp Inf Manag 31:550–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-01-2018-0020CrossRef

Chang YH, Shao PC, Chen HJ (2015) Performance evaluation of airport safety management systems in Taiwan. Saf Sci 75:72–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.12.006CrossRef

Chatterjee K, Zavadskas EK, Tamošaitiene J, Adhikary K, Kar S (2018) A hybrid MCDM technique for risk management in construction projects. Symmetry (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10020046CrossRefMATH

Chen TY (2018) Remoteness index-based Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR methods with a generalized distance measure for multiple criteria decision analysis. Inf Fusion 41:129–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2017.09.003CrossRef

Chen T (2019) Multiple criteria group decision making using a parametric linear programming technique for multidimensional analysis of preference under uncertainty of pythagorean fuzziness. IEEE Access 7:174108–174128. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957161CrossRef

Chen TY (2020) New Chebyshev distance measures for Pythagorean fuzzy sets with applications to multiple criteria decision analysis using an extended ELECTRE approach. Expert Syst Appl 147:113164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.113164CrossRef

Chen YC, Lien HP, Tzeng GH (2010) Measures and evaluation for environment watershed plans using a novel hybrid MCDM model. Expert Syst Appl 37:926–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.04.068CrossRef

Chen F, Wang J, Deng Y (2015) Road safety risk evaluation by means of improved entropy TOPSIS-RSR. Saf Sci 79:39–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.05.006CrossRef

Chen TL, Hsu HM, Pan SY, Chiang PC (2019) Advances and challenges of implementing carbon offset mechanism for a low carbon economy: the Taiwanese experience. J Clean Prod 239:117860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117860CrossRef

Chu Y, Sun L, Li L (2019) Lightweight scheme selection for automotive safety structures using a quantifiable multi-objective approach. J Clean Prod 241:118316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118316CrossRef

Daneshvar S, Yazdi M, Adesina KA (2020) Fuzzy smart failure modes and effects analysis to improve safety performance of system: case study of an aircraft landing system. Qual Reliab Eng Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2607CrossRef

Ding XF, Liu HC (2019) A new approach for emergency decision-making based on zero-sum game with Pythagorean fuzzy uncertain linguistic variables. Int J Intell Syst 34:1667–1684. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22113CrossRef

dos Santos BM, Godoy LP, Campos LMS (2019) Performance evaluation of green suppliers using entropy-TOPSIS-F. J Clean Prod 207:498–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.235CrossRef

El-Latif AAA, Abd-El-Atty B, Hossain MS, Rahman MA, Alamri A, Gupta BB (2018) Efficient quantum information hiding for remote medical image sharing. IEEE Access 6:21075–21083. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2820603CrossRef

Golilarz NA, Gao H, Pirasteh S, Yazdi M, Zhou J, Fu Y (2021) Satellite multispectral and hyperspectral image de-noising with enhanced adaptive generalized gaussian distribution threshold in the wavelet domain. Remote Sens. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13010101CrossRef

Hsu TK, Tsai YF, Wu HH (2009) The preference analysis for tourist choice of destination: a case study of Taiwan. Tour Manag 30:288–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.07.011CrossRef

Hwang C-L, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9CrossRefMATH

Inamdar PM, Sharma AK, Cook S, Perera BJC (2018) Evaluation of stormwater harvesting sites using multi criteria decision methodology. J Hydrol 562:181–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.04.066CrossRef

Jato-Espino D, Castillo-Lopez E, Rodriguez-Hernandez J, Canteras-Jordana JC (2014) A review of application of multi-criteria decision making methods in construction. Autom Constr 45:151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2014.05.013CrossRef

Jozaghi A, Alizadeh B, Hatami M, Flood I, Khorrami M, Khodaei N, Tousi EG (2018) A comparative study of the AHP and TOPSIS techniques for dam site selection using GIS: a case study of Sistan and Baluchestan Province. Iran Geosci 8:1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8120494CrossRef

Kabir S, Yazdi M, Aizpurua JI, Papadopoulos Y (2018) Uncertainty-aware dynamic reliability analysis framework for complex systems. IEEE Access. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2843166CrossRef

Kabir S, Geok TANKIM, Kumar M, Yazdi M, Hossain F (2020) A method for temporal fault tree analysis using intuitionistic fuzzy set and expert elicitation. IEEE Access 8:980–996. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2961953CrossRef

Kaya R, Yet B (2019) Building Bayesian networks based on DEMATEL for multiple criteria decision problems: a supplier selection case study. Expert Syst Appl 134:234–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.053CrossRef

Khalili-Damghani K, Abtahi AR, Tavana M (2014) A decision support system for solving multi-objective redundancy allocation problems. Qual Reliab Eng Int 30:1249–1262. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1545CrossRef

Khan MW, Ali Y, De Felice F, Petrillo A (2019) Occupational health and safety in construction industry in Pakistan using modified-SIRA method. Saf Sci 118:109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.001CrossRef

Li M, Cao P (2019) Computers and industrial engineering extended TODIM method for multi-attribute risk decision making problems in emergency response. Comput Ind Eng 135:1286–1293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.06.027CrossRef

Li D, Zeng W (2018) Distance measure of pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 33:348–361. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21934CrossRef

Li YL, Ying CS, Chin KS, Yang HT, Xu J (2018) Third-party reverse logistics provider selection approach based on hybrid-information MCDM and cumulative prospect theory. J Clean Prod 195:573–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.213CrossRef

Li J, Fang H, Song W (2019) Sustainable supplier selection based on SSCM practices: a rough cloud TOPSIS approach. J Clean Prod 222:606–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.070CrossRef

Liu J, Wei Q (2018) Risk evaluation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure public-private partnership projects in China using fuzzy TOPSIS. J Clean Prod 189:211–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.103CrossRef

Liu HC, Ren ML, Wu J, Lin QL (2014) An interval 2-tuple linguistic MCDM method for robot evaluation and selection. Int J Prod Res 52:2867–2880. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2013.854939CrossRef

Liu Q, Chen Y, Tian C, Zheng XQ, Li JF (2016) Strategic deliberation on development of low-carbon energy system in China. Adv Clim Chang Res 7:26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2016.04.002CrossRef

Liu J, Zhao HK, Li ZB, Liu SF (2017) Decision process in MCDM with large number of criteria and heterogeneous risk preferences. Oper Res Perspect 4:106–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orp.2017.07.001MathSciNetCrossRef

Liu A, Ji X, Lu H, Liu H (2019a) The selection of 3PRLs on self-service mobile recycling machine: Interval-valued pythagorean hesitant fuzzy best-worst multi-criteria group decision-making. J Clean Prod 230:734–750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.257CrossRef

Liu X, Zhou X, Zhu B, He K, Wang P (2019b) Measuring the maturity of carbon market in China: an entropy-based TOPSIS approach. J Clean Prod 229:94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.380CrossRef

Mamta D, Gupta B (2021) An attribute-based keyword search for m-Health networks. J Comput Virol Hacking Tech 17:21–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11416-020-00361-zCrossRef

Marzouk M, Daour IA (2018) Planning labor evacuation for construction sites using BIM and agent-based simulation. Saf Sci 109:174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.04.023CrossRef

May Tzuc O, Bassam A, Ricalde LJ, Jaramillo OA, Flota-Bañuelos M, Escalante Soberanis MA (2020) Environmental-economic optimization for implementation of parabolic collectors in the industrial process heat generation: case study of Mexico. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118538CrossRef

Mehrabadi ZK, Boyaghchi FA (2019) Thermodynamic, economic and environmental impact studies on various distillation units integrated with gasification-based multi-generation system: comparative study and optimization. J Clean Prod 241:118333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118333CrossRef

Meriam JL, James L, Kraige LG, Bolton JN, Jeff N (2009) Engineering mechanics

Nawaz F, Asadabadi MR, Janjua NK, Hussain OK, Chang E, Saberi M (2018) An MCDM method for cloud service selection using a Markov chain and the best-worst method. Knowl-Based Syst 159:120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.06.010CrossRef

Nedjati A, Vizvari B, Izbirak G (2016) Post-earthquake response by small UAV helicopters. Nat Hazards 80:1669–1688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-2046-6CrossRef

Nguyen S (2018) Development of an MCDM framework to facilitate low carbon shipping technology application. Asian J Shipp Logist 34:317–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2018.12.005CrossRef

Nie W, Liu W, Wu Z, Chen B, Wu L (2019) Failure mode and effects analysis by integrating Bayesian fuzzy assessment number and extended gray relational analysis-technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution method. Qual Reliab Eng Int 35:1676–1697. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2468CrossRef

Opricovic S, Tzeng G-H (2004a) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156:445–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1CrossRefMATH

Peng X, Selvachandran G (2019) Pythagorean fuzzy set: state of the art and future directions. Artif Intell Rev 52:1873–1927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-017-9596-9CrossRef

Peng X, Yang Y (2014) Some results for pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 29:495–524CrossRef

Rausand M, Hoyland A (2004) System reliability theory: models. Stat Methods Appl. https://doi.org/10.1109/WESCON.1996.554026CrossRefMATH

Ren P, Xu Z, Gou X (2016) Pythagorean fuzzy TODIM approach to multi-criteria decision making. Appl Soft Comput J 42:246–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.12.020CrossRef

Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega (United Kingdom) 53:49–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009CrossRef

Rostamzadeh R, Ghorabaee MK, Govindan K, Esmaeili A, Nobar HBK (2018) Evaluation of sustainable supply chain risk management using an integrated fuzzy TOPSIS-CRITIC approach. J Clean Prod 175:651–669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.071CrossRef

Selim H, Yunusoglu MG, Yilmaz Balaman Ş (2016) A dynamic maintenance planning framework based on fuzzy TOPSIS and FMEA: application in an international food company. Qual Reliab Eng Int 32:795–804. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1791CrossRef

Şimşek B, Iç YT (2014) Multi-response simulation optimization approach for the performance optimization of an Alarm Monitoring Center. Saf Sci 66:61–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.001CrossRef

Song W, Ming X, Wu Z, Zhu B (2014) A rough TOPSIS approach for failure mode and effects analysis in uncertain environments. Qual Reliab Eng Int 30:473–486. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.1500CrossRef

Srdjevic B, Medeiros YDP, Faria AS (2004) An objective multi-criteria evaluation of water management scenarios. Water Resour Manag 18:35–54. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:WARM.0000015348.88832.52CrossRef

Taylan O, Bafail AO, Abdulaal RMS, Kabli MR (2014) Construction projects selection and risk assessment by fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methodologies. Appl Soft Comput J 17:105–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2014.01.003CrossRef

Tsaura SH, Chang TY, Yen CH (2002) The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM. Tour Manag 23:107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(01)00050-4CrossRef

Tzeng GH, Chiang CH, Li CW (2007) Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: a novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Syst Appl 32:1028–1044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.004CrossRef

Wang YM, Elhag TMS (2006) Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment. Expert Syst Appl 31:309–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2005.09.040CrossRef

Wang CN, Huang YF, Cheng IF, Nguyen VT (2018) A multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach using hybrid SCOR metrics, AHP, and TOPSIS for supplier evaluation and selection in the gas and oil industry. Processes. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr6120252CrossRef

Wang B, Xie HL, Ren HY, Li X, Chen L, Wu BC (2019a) Application of AHP, TOPSIS, and TFNs to plant selection for phytoremediation of petroleum-contaminated soils in shale gas and oil fields. J Clean Prod 233:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.301CrossRef

Wang L, Hu YP, Liu HC, Shi H (2019b) A linguistic risk prioritization approach for failure mode and effects analysis: a case study of medical product development. Qual Reliab Eng Int 35:1735–1752. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2472CrossRef

Wu WW (2008) Choosing knowledge management strategies by using a combined ANP and DEMATEL approach. Expert Syst Appl 35:828–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.07.025CrossRef

Wu B, Yan X, Wang Y, Guedes Soares C (2016) Selection of maritime safety control options for NUC ships using a hybrid group decision-making approach. Saf Sci 88:108–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.04.026CrossRef

Wu Y, Xu C, Zhang T (2018) Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: a case in China. Energy 147:1227–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.115CrossRef

Xu Z, Yager RR (2006) Some geometric aggregation operators based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Gen Syst 35:417–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081070600574353MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Xu X, Du Z, Chen X (2015) Consensus model for multi-criteria large-group emergency decision making considering non-cooperative behaviors and minority opinions. Decis Support Syst 79:150–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2015.08.009CrossRef

Yager RR (2013) Pythagorean fuzzy subsets. In: Proc. 2013 Jt. IFSA World Congr. NAFIPS Annu. Meet. IFSA/NAFIPS, vol 2, pp 57–61. https://doi.org/10.1109/IFSA-NAFIPS.2013.6608375

Yager RR (2014) Pythagorean membership grades in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22:958–965. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2278989CrossRef

Yang JJ, Chuang YC, Lo HW, Lee TI (2020) A two-stage MCDM model for exploring the influential relationships of sustainable sports tourism criteria in Taichung City. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072319CrossRef

Yaseen Q, Aldwairi M, Jararweh Y, Al-Ayyoub M, Gupta B (2018) Collusion attacks mitigation in internet of things: a fog based model. Multimed Tools Appl 77:18249–18268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-5288-3CrossRef

Yazdi M (2018) Improving failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) with consideration of uncertainty handling as an interactive approach. Int J Interact Des Manuf. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-018-0496-2CrossRef

Yazdi M (2018b) Footprint of knowledge acquisition improvement in failure diagnosis analysis. Qual Reliab Eng Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2408CrossRef

Yazdi M (2019a) A review paper to examine the validity of Bayesian network to build rational consensus in subjective probabilistic failure analysis. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 10:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-018-00757-7CrossRef

Yazdi M (2019b) Ignorance-aware safety and reliability analysis: a heuristic approach. Qual Reliab Eng Int 36:652–674. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2597MathSciNetCrossRef

Yazdi M (2019c) A perceptual computing-based method to prioritize intervention actions in the probabilistic risk assessment techniques. Qual Reliab Eng Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2566CrossRef

Yazdi M (2019d) Introducing a heuristic approach to enhance the reliability of system safety assessment. Qual Reliab Eng Int. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.2545CrossRef

Yazdi M, Kabir S (2017) A fuzzy Bayesian network approach for risk analysis in process industries. Process Saf Environ Prot 111:507–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2017.08.015CrossRef

Yazdi M, Kabir S (2018) Fuzzy evidence theory and Bayesian networks for process systems risk analysis. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2018.1493679CrossRef

Yazdi M, Nedjati A, Abbassi R (2019) Fuzzy dynamic risk-based maintenance investment optimization for offshore process facilities. J Loss Prev Process Ind. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2018.11.014CrossRef

Yazdi M, Adesina KA, Korhan O, Nikfar F (2019a) Learning from fire accident at Bouali sina petrochemical complex plant. J Fail Anal Prev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-019-00769-wCrossRef

Yazdi M, Hafezi P, Abbassi R (2019b) A methodology for enhancing the reliability of expert system applications in probabilistic risk assessment. J Loss Prev Process Ind. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2019.02.001CrossRef

Yazdi M, Kabir S, Walker M (2019c) Uncertainty handling in fault tree based risk assessment: state of the art and future perspectives. Process Saf Environ Prot 131:89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.09.003CrossRef

Yazdi M, Korhan O, Daneshvar S (2020) Application of fuzzy fault tree analysis based on modified fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS for fire and explosion in the process industry. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 26:319–335CrossRef

Yazdi M, Nedjati A, Zarei E, Abbassi R (2020) A novel extension of DEMATEL approach for probabilistic safety analysis in process systems. Saf Sci. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.09.006CrossRef

Yazdi M, Khan F, Abbassi R, Rusli R (2020) Improved DEMATEL methodology for effective safety management decision-making. Saf Sci 127:104705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104705CrossRef

Yazdi M, Golilarz NA, Nedjati A, Adesina KA (2021) An improved lasso regression model for evaluating the efficiency of intervention actions in a system reliability analysis. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-020-05537-8CrossRef

Yousefzadeh S, Yaghmaeian K, Mahvi AH, Nasseri S, Alavi N, Nabizadeh R (2020) Comparative analysis of hydrometallurgical methods for the recovery of Cu from circuit boards: Optimization using response surface and selection of the best technique by two-step fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method. J Clean Prod 249:119401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119401CrossRef

Yu X, Xu Z (2013) Prioritized intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. Inf Fusion 14:108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2012.01.011CrossRef

Zadeh L (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353CrossRef

Zadeh LA (2015) Fuzzy logic—a personal perspective. Fuzzy Sets Syst 281:4–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2015.05.009MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Zarbakhshnia N, Soleimani H, Ghaderi H (2018) Sustainable third-party reverse logistics provider evaluation and selection using fuzzy SWARA and developed fuzzy COPRAS in the presence of risk criteria. Appl Soft Comput J 65:307–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2018.01.023CrossRef

Zare M, Pahl C, Rahnama H, Nilashi M, Mardani A, Ibrahim O, Ahmadi H (2016) Multi-criteria decision making approach in E-learning: a systematic review and classification. Appl Soft Comput J 45:108–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2016.04.020CrossRef

Zarei E, Khakzad N, Cozzani V, Reniers G (2019) Safety analysis of process systems using Fuzzy Bayesian Network (FBN). J Loss Prev Process Ind. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2018.10.011CrossRef

Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Tamošaitiene J (2010) Risk assessment of construction projects. J Civ Eng Manag 16:33–46. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2010.03CrossRef

Zeng W, Li D, Yin Q (2018) Distance and similarity measures of Pythagorean fuzzy sets and their applications to multiple criteria group decision making. Int J Intell Syst 33:2236–2254. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22027CrossRef

Zhang X (2016) Multicriteria Pythagorean fuzzy decision analysis: a hierarchical QUALIFLEX approach with the closeness index-based ranking methods. Inf Sci (NY) 330:104–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.10.012CrossRef

Zhang X, Xu Z (2014) Extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 29:1061–1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21676CrossRef

Zhang L, Wang Y, Zhao X (2018) Knowledge-Based systems a new emergency decision support methodology based on multi-source knowledge in 2-tuple linguistic model. Knowl-Based Syst 144:77–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.12.026CrossRef

Zhao H, Guo S, Zhao H (2019) Comprehensive assessment for battery energy storage systems based on fuzzy-MCDM considering risk preferences. Energy 168:450–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.11.129CrossRef

Zhou L, Wu X, Xu Z, Fujita H (2018) Emergency decision making for natural disasters: An overview. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 27:567–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.09.037CrossRef

Titel: An improved multi-criteria emergency decision-making method in environmental disasters
verfasst von: Guang-Jun Jiang
Hong-Xia Chen
Hong-Hua Sun
Mohammad Yazdi
Arman Nedjati
Kehinde Adewale Adesina
Publikationsdatum: 19.05.2021
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Soft Computing / Ausgabe 15/2021
Print ISSN: 1432-7643
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7479
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-05826-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 15/2021

Washing machine using fuzzy logic controller to provide wash quality

Solution of multi-objective transportation-p-facility location problem with effect of variable carbon emission by evolutionary algorithms

Penalty term based suitable fuzzy intuitionistic possibilistic clustering: analyzing high dimensional gene expression cancer database

Deep logarithmic neural network for Internet intrusion detection

Analyzing travel time belief reliability in road network under uncertain random environment

Arabic sentence similarity based on similarity features and machine learning

Premium Partner