nach oben

Soft Computing

Erschienen in:

07.03.2019 | Methodologies and Application

Application of fuzzy ordered weighted geometric averaging (FOWGA) operator for project delivery system decision-making

verfasst von: Xun Liu, Hong Liu

Erschienen in: Soft Computing | Ausgabe 24/2019

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Appropriate project delivery model is one of the key factors affecting a project’s success. Most decision-making methods of project delivery are based on vague qualitative indicators. However, a numerical scale is usually unable to effectively and accurately reflect the preferences of decision-makers. Scholars have found that applying the fuzzy set theory and using the fuzzy ordered weighted geometric averaging (FOWGA) operator for project delivery system (PDS) decision could reduce the judgment information losing to a certain extent and improve the objectivity and fairness of group decision-making. In this study, we further addressed the decision method and procedure for PDS decision by using the FOWGA operator and demonstrated the mode selection method as well. The results demonstrated that the method can overcome the current drawback of subjectivity of the project delivery decision method, better solve the decision-making information losing problem during assembling process and further reflect the priority of the PDS so as to improve the efficiency of the group decision.

Vorheriger Artikel Efficient parallel tabu search for the blocking job shop scheduling problem

Nächster Artikel Random credibilitic portfolio selection problem with different convex transaction costs

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

Al Khalil MI (2002) Selecting the appropriate project delivery method using AHP. Int J Proj Manag 20(6):469–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(01)00032-1 CrossRef

Alhazmi T, McCaffer R (2000) Project procurement system selection model. J Constr Eng Manag 126(3):176–184. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2000)126:3(176) CrossRef

Arnold K, Madan MG (1985) Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic: theory and applications. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New YorkMATH

Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Set Syst 20(1):87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3 CrossRefMATH

Chan CTW (2007) Fuzzy procurement selection model for construction projects. Constr Manag Econ 25(6):611–618. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190701209933 CrossRef

Chan APC, Ho DCK, Tam CM (2001a) Design and build project success factors: multivariate analysis. J Constr Eng Manag 127(2):93–100. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2001)127:2(93) CrossRef

Chan APC, Yung EHK, Lam PTI, Tam CM, Cheung SO (2001b) Application of Delphi method in selection of procurement systems for construction projects. Constr Manag Econ 19(7):699–718. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190110066128 CrossRef

Chen YQ, Lu H, Lu W, Zhang N (2010) Analysis of project delivery systems in Chinese construction industry with data envelopment analysis (DEA). Eng Constr Arch Manag 17(6):598–614. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699981011090215 CrossRef

Chen YQ, Liu JY, Li B, Lin B (2011) Project delivery system selection of construction projects in China. Expert Syst Appl 38(5):5456–5462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.008 CrossRef

Cheung SO, Lam TI, Wan YW, Lam KC (2001) Improving objectivity in procurement selection. J Manag Eng 17(3):132–139. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2001)17:3(132) CrossRef

Groton JP, Smith GA (1998) Feature: weighing the options. J Manag Eng 14(6):69–72. http://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X CrossRef

Gransberg DD, Dillon WD, Reynolds L, Boyd J (1999) Quantitative analysis of partnered project performance. J Constr Eng Manag 125(3):161–166. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1999)125:3(161) CrossRef

Herrera-Viedma E, Cordón O, Luque M, Lopez AG, Muñoz AM (2003) A model of fuzzy linguistic IRS based on multi-granular linguistic information. Int J Approx Reason 34(2–3):221–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2003.07.009 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Hong HK, Kim JS, Kim T, Leem B (2008) The effect of knowledge on system integration project performance. Ind Manag Data Syst 108(3):385–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570810858787 CrossRef

Ibbs W, Chih YY (2011) Alternative methods for choosing an appropriate project delivery system (PDS). Facilities 29(13/14):527–541. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771111178418 CrossRef

Ibbs CW, Kwak YH, Ng T, Odabasi A (2003) Project delivery systems and project change: quantitative analysis. J Constr Eng Manag 129(4):382–387. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2003)129:4(382) CrossRef

Konchar M, Sanvido V (1998) Comparison of US project delivery systems. J Constr Eng Manag 124(6):435–444. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1998)124:6(435) CrossRef

Kumaraswamy MM, Dissanayaka SM (2001) Developing a decision support system for building project procurement. Build Environ 36(3):337–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1323(00)00011-1 CrossRef

Laedre O, Austeng K, Haugen T, Klakegg O (2006) Procurement routes in public building and construction projects. J Constr Eng Manag 132(7):689–696. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2006)132:7(689) CrossRef

Li H, Arditi D, Wang Z (2013) Factors that affect transaction costs in construction projects. J Constr Eng Manag 139(1):60–68. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000573 CrossRef

Ling FYY, Liu M (2004) Using neural network to predict performance of design-build projects in Singapore. Build Environ 39(10):1263–1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.02.008 CrossRef

Ling FYY, Chan SL, Chong E, Ee LP (2004) Predicting performance of design-build and design-bid-build projects. J Constr Eng Manag 130(1):75–83. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2004)130:1(75) CrossRef

Liu B, Huo T, Wang X, Shen Q, Chen Y (2013) The decision model of the intuitionistic fuzzy group bid evaluation for urban infrastructure projects considering social costs. Can J Civ Eng 40(3):263–273. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2012-0283 CrossRef

Liu B, Huo T, Shen Q, Yang Z, Meng J, Xue B (2014) Which owner characteristics are key factors affecting project delivery system decision making? Empirical analysis based on the rough set theory. J Manag Eng 31(4):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ME.1943-5479.0000298 CrossRef

Lo SC, Chao Y (2007) Efficiency assessment of road project delivery models. In: AIP conference proceedings. AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2835911

Love PED, Skitmore M, Earl G (1998) Selecting a suitable procurement method for a building project. Constr Manag Econ 16(2):221–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/014461998372501 CrossRef

Luu DT, Ng ST, Chen SE (2003a) Parameters governing the selection of procurement system—an empirical survey. Eng Constr Arch Manag 10(3):209–218. https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980310478458 CrossRef

Luu DT, Ng ST, Chen SE (2003b) A case-based procurement advisory system for construction. Adv Eng Softw 34(7):429–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0965-9978(03)00043-7 CrossRef

Luu DT, Ng ST, Chen SE (2005) Formulating procurement selection criteria through case-based reasoning approach. J Comput Civ Eng 19(3):269–276. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0887-3801(2005)19:3(269) CrossRef

Mafakheri F, Dai L, Slezak D, Nasiri F (2007) Project delivery system selection under un-certainty: multicriteria multilevel decision aid model. J Manag Eng 23(4):200–206. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0742-597X(2007)23:4(200) CrossRef

Mahdi IM, Alreshaid K (2005) Decision support system for selecting the proper project delivery method using analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Int J Proj Manag 23(7):564–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.05.007 CrossRef

Masterman J, Duff A (1994) The selection of building procurement systems by client organizations. In: Proceedings of the 10th annual ARCOM conference. Loughborough University of Technology

Mollaoglu-Korkmaz S, Swarup L, Riley D (2013) Delivering sustainable, high-performance buildings: influence of project delivery methods on integration and project outcomes. J Manag Eng 29(1):71–78. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000114 CrossRef

Mostafavi A, Karamouz M (2010) Selecting appropriate project delivery system: fuzzy approach with risk analysis. J Constr Eng Manag 136(8):923–930. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)CO.1943-7862.0000190 CrossRef

Naoum SG (1994) Critical analysis of time and cost of management and traditional contracts. J Constr Eng Manag 120(4):687–705. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(1994)120:4(687) CrossRef

Ng ST, Luu DT, Chen SE, Lam KC (2002) Fuzzy membership functions of procurement selection criteria. Constr Manag Econ 20(3):285–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190210121288 CrossRef

Ng T, Luu C, Skitmore M (2012) Capitalising experiential knowledge for guiding construction procurement selection. Austr J Constr Econ Build 5(1):32–40. https://doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v5i1.2941 CrossRef

Ojiako U, Johansen E, Greenwood D (2008) A qualitative re-construction of project measurement criteria. Ind Manag Data Syst 108(3):405–417. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570810858796 CrossRef

Oyetunji AA, Anderson SD (2006) Relative effectiveness of project delivery and contract strategies. J Constr Eng Manag 132(1):3–13. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9364(2006)132:1(3) CrossRef

Ribeiro FL (2001) Project delivery system selection: a case-based reasoning framework. Log Inf Manag 14(5/6):367–376. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006248 CrossRef

Rwelamila PD, Meyer C (1999) Appropriate or default project procurement systems? Cost Eng 41(9):40–44

Skitmore R, Marsden D (1988) Which procurement system? Towards a universal procurement selection technique. Constr Manag Econ 6(1):71–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446198800000008 CrossRef

Songer AD, Molenaar KR (1996) Selecting design-build: public and private sector owner attitudes. J Manag Eng 12(6):47–53. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(1996)12:6(47) CrossRef

Tan C, Chen X (2016) Generalized archimedean intuitionistic fuzzy averaging aggregation operators and their application to multicriteria decision-making. Int J Inf Technol Decis 15(2):311–352. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622016500048 CrossRef

Torra V (2004) OWA operators in data modeling and reidentification. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 12(5):652–660. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2004.834814 CrossRef

Touran A, Gransberg DD, Molenaar KR, Ghavamifar K (2011) Selection of project delivery method in transit: drivers and objectives. J Manag Eng 27(1):21–27. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)me.1943-5479.0000027 CrossRef

Xu Z (2007) Intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 15(6):1179–1187. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2006.890678 CrossRef

Xu Z (2016) Additive intuitionistic fuzzy aggregation operators based on fuzzy measure. Int J Uncertain Fuzzy 24(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021848851650001X MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Xu Z, Yager RR (2006) Some geometric aggregation operators based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Gen Syst 35(4):417–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081070600574353 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operations in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18(1):183–190CrossRef

Yager RR (1995) An approach to ordinal decision making. Int J Approx Reason 12(3):237–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/0888-613X(94)00035-2 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Yager RR, Kreinovich V (1999) Decision making under interval probabilities. Int J Approx Reason 22(3):195–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0888-613X(99)00028-6 MathSciNetCrossRefMATH

Zhou W, Xu Z (2017) Extreme intuitionistic fuzzy weighted aggregation operators and their applications in optimism and pessimism decision-making processes. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(1):1129–1138. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-16516 CrossRefMATH

Titel: Application of fuzzy ordered weighted geometric averaging (FOWGA) operator for project delivery system decision-making
verfasst von: Xun Liu
Hong Liu
Publikationsdatum: 07.03.2019
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Soft Computing / Ausgabe 24/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-7643
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-7479
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03872-0

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 24/2019

Analysis of remote sensing imagery for disaster assessment using deep learning: a case study of flooding event

An identity-based encryption technique using subtree for fuzzy user data sharing under cloud computing environment

Deriving priority weights from hesitant fuzzy preference relations in view of additive consistency and consensus

An improved general type-2 fuzzy sets type reduction and its application in general type-2 fuzzy controller design

Feature–granularity selection with variable costs for hybrid data

Optimal control strategies for a hybrid renewable energy system: an ALANN/RNN technique