选择铁路项目起始地点的综合多标准决策方法

IF 3.6 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Harun Turkoglu, Emel Sadikoglu, Sevilay Demirkesen, Atilla Damci, Serra Acar
{"title":"选择铁路项目起始地点的综合多标准决策方法","authors":"Harun Turkoglu, Emel Sadikoglu, Sevilay Demirkesen, Atilla Damci, Serra Acar","doi":"10.1108/ecam-06-2024-0764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The successful completion of linear infrastructure construction projects such as railroads, roads, tunnels, and pipelines relies heavily on decision-making processes during planning phase. Professionals in the construction industry emphasize that determining the starting point of a linear infrastructure construction project is one of the most important decisions to be made in the planning phase. However, the existing literature does not specifically focus on selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to develop a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model to support selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed in linear infrastructure construction projects.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Based on the characteristics of the railroad projects and insights gathered from expert interviews, the appropriate criteria for the model were determined. Once the criteria were determined, a decision hierarchy was developed and the weights of the criteria (w_i) were calculated using DEcision MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Then, Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), COmplex PRoportional Assessment (COPRAS), and evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) methods were used. The alternatives were ranked in terms of their priority with TOPSIS method based on relative closeness (Ci) of each alternative to the ideal solution, COPRAS method based on quantitative utility (Ui) for each alternative and EDAS method based on evaluation score (ASi) for all alternatives. The results were compared with each other.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The study reveals the effects of all criteria on the proposed model. The results of DEMATEL method indicated that quantity of aggregate (w_i = 0.075), ballast (w_i = 0.071), and sub-ballast (w_i = 0.069) are the most important criteria in starting location selection for railroads, where earthquake (w_i = 0.046), excavation cost (w_i = 0.054), and longest distance from borrow pit (w_i = 0.055) were found to be less important criteria. The starting location alternatives were ranked based on TOPSIS, COPRAS and EDAS methods. The A-1 alternative was selected as the most appropriate alternative (Ci = 0.64; Ui = 100%; ASi = 0.81), followed by A-6 alternative (Ci = 0.61; Ui = 97%; ASi = 0.73) and A-7 alternative (Ci = 0.59; Ui = 94%; ASi = 0.60). Even tough different methods were used, they provided compatible results where the same ranking was achieved except three alternatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study identifies novel criteria for the starting location selection of railroad construction based on the data of a railroad project. This study uses different methods for selecting the starting location. Considering the project type and its scope, the model can be used by decision-makers in linear infrastructure projects for which efficient planning and effective location selection are critical for successful operations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":11888,"journal":{"name":"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An integrated multi-criteria decision making approach for selecting the starting location of railroad projects\",\"authors\":\"Harun Turkoglu, Emel Sadikoglu, Sevilay Demirkesen, Atilla Damci, Serra Acar\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ecam-06-2024-0764\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>The successful completion of linear infrastructure construction projects such as railroads, roads, tunnels, and pipelines relies heavily on decision-making processes during planning phase. Professionals in the construction industry emphasize that determining the starting point of a linear infrastructure construction project is one of the most important decisions to be made in the planning phase. However, the existing literature does not specifically focus on selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to develop a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model to support selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed in linear infrastructure construction projects.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>Based on the characteristics of the railroad projects and insights gathered from expert interviews, the appropriate criteria for the model were determined. Once the criteria were determined, a decision hierarchy was developed and the weights of the criteria (w_i) were calculated using DEcision MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Then, Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), COmplex PRoportional Assessment (COPRAS), and evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) methods were used. The alternatives were ranked in terms of their priority with TOPSIS method based on relative closeness (Ci) of each alternative to the ideal solution, COPRAS method based on quantitative utility (Ui) for each alternative and EDAS method based on evaluation score (ASi) for all alternatives. The results were compared with each other.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>The study reveals the effects of all criteria on the proposed model. The results of DEMATEL method indicated that quantity of aggregate (w_i = 0.075), ballast (w_i = 0.071), and sub-ballast (w_i = 0.069) are the most important criteria in starting location selection for railroads, where earthquake (w_i = 0.046), excavation cost (w_i = 0.054), and longest distance from borrow pit (w_i = 0.055) were found to be less important criteria. The starting location alternatives were ranked based on TOPSIS, COPRAS and EDAS methods. The A-1 alternative was selected as the most appropriate alternative (Ci = 0.64; Ui = 100%; ASi = 0.81), followed by A-6 alternative (Ci = 0.61; Ui = 97%; ASi = 0.73) and A-7 alternative (Ci = 0.59; Ui = 94%; ASi = 0.60). Even tough different methods were used, they provided compatible results where the same ranking was achieved except three alternatives.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>This study identifies novel criteria for the starting location selection of railroad construction based on the data of a railroad project. This study uses different methods for selecting the starting location. Considering the project type and its scope, the model can be used by decision-makers in linear infrastructure projects for which efficient planning and effective location selection are critical for successful operations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":11888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-06-2024-0764\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ecam-06-2024-0764","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 成功完成铁路、公路、隧道和管道等线性基础设施建设项目在很大程度上取决于规划阶段的决策过程。建筑行业的专业人士强调,确定线性基础设施建设项目的起点是规划阶段最重要的决策之一。然而,现有文献并未特别关注待建路段起点的选择。因此,开发一个多标准决策(MCDM)模型来支持线性基础设施建设项目中施工段起点的选择至关重要。一旦确定了标准,就制定了决策层次结构,并使用决策制定试验和评估实验室(DEMATEL)方法计算了标准的权重(w_i)。然后,使用了与理想解决方案相似度排序技术(TOPSIS)、复合比例评估(COPRAS)和基于平均解决方案距离的评估(EDAS)方法。TOPSIS 法基于每个备选方案与理想方案的相对接近程度(Ci),COPRAS 法基于每个备选方案的定量效用(Ui),EDAS 法基于所有备选方案的评价得分(ASi),对备选方案的优先级进行排序。研究结果该研究揭示了所有标准对拟议模型的影响。DEMATEL 法的结果表明,集料数量(w_i = 0.075)、道碴(w_i = 0.071)和底碴(w_i = 0.069)是铁路起始位置选择中最重要的标准,而地震(w_i = 0.046)、挖掘成本(w_i = 0.054)和距借料坑最远的距离(w_i = 0.055)则是不太重要的标准。根据 TOPSIS、COPRAS 和 EDAS 方法对起始地点备选方案进行了排序。A-1 备选方案被选为最合适的备选方案(Ci = 0.64;Ui = 100%;ASi = 0.81),其次是 A-6 备选方案(Ci = 0.61;Ui = 97%;ASi = 0.73)和 A-7 备选方案(Ci = 0.59;Ui = 94%;ASi = 0.60)。即使使用了不同的方法,它们也提供了一致的结果,即除了三个备选方案外,其他三个备选方案都获得了相同的排名。本研究采用了不同的起始地点选择方法。考虑到项目类型及其范围,该模型可供线性基础设施项目的决策者使用,因为高效规划和有效选址对项目的成功运营至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An integrated multi-criteria decision making approach for selecting the starting location of railroad projects

Purpose

The successful completion of linear infrastructure construction projects such as railroads, roads, tunnels, and pipelines relies heavily on decision-making processes during planning phase. Professionals in the construction industry emphasize that determining the starting point of a linear infrastructure construction project is one of the most important decisions to be made in the planning phase. However, the existing literature does not specifically focus on selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to develop a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model to support selection of the starting point of the segments to be constructed in linear infrastructure construction projects.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on the characteristics of the railroad projects and insights gathered from expert interviews, the appropriate criteria for the model were determined. Once the criteria were determined, a decision hierarchy was developed and the weights of the criteria (w_i) were calculated using DEcision MAking Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) method. Then, Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), COmplex PRoportional Assessment (COPRAS), and evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS) methods were used. The alternatives were ranked in terms of their priority with TOPSIS method based on relative closeness (Ci) of each alternative to the ideal solution, COPRAS method based on quantitative utility (Ui) for each alternative and EDAS method based on evaluation score (ASi) for all alternatives. The results were compared with each other.

Findings

The study reveals the effects of all criteria on the proposed model. The results of DEMATEL method indicated that quantity of aggregate (w_i = 0.075), ballast (w_i = 0.071), and sub-ballast (w_i = 0.069) are the most important criteria in starting location selection for railroads, where earthquake (w_i = 0.046), excavation cost (w_i = 0.054), and longest distance from borrow pit (w_i = 0.055) were found to be less important criteria. The starting location alternatives were ranked based on TOPSIS, COPRAS and EDAS methods. The A-1 alternative was selected as the most appropriate alternative (Ci = 0.64; Ui = 100%; ASi = 0.81), followed by A-6 alternative (Ci = 0.61; Ui = 97%; ASi = 0.73) and A-7 alternative (Ci = 0.59; Ui = 94%; ASi = 0.60). Even tough different methods were used, they provided compatible results where the same ranking was achieved except three alternatives.

Originality/value

This study identifies novel criteria for the starting location selection of railroad construction based on the data of a railroad project. This study uses different methods for selecting the starting location. Considering the project type and its scope, the model can be used by decision-makers in linear infrastructure projects for which efficient planning and effective location selection are critical for successful operations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management Business, Management and Accounting-General Business,Management and Accounting
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
19.50%
发文量
226
期刊介绍: ECAM publishes original peer-reviewed research papers, case studies, technical notes, book reviews, features, discussions and other contemporary articles that advance research and practice in engineering, construction and architectural management. In particular, ECAM seeks to advance integrated design and construction practices, project lifecycle management, and sustainable construction. The journal’s scope covers all aspects of architectural design, design management, construction/project management, engineering management of major infrastructure projects, and the operation and management of constructed facilities. ECAM also addresses the technological, process, economic/business, environmental/sustainability, political, and social/human developments that influence the construction project delivery process. ECAM strives to establish strong theoretical and empirical debates in the above areas of engineering, architecture, and construction research. Papers should be heavily integrated with the existing and current body of knowledge within the field and develop explicit and novel contributions. Acknowledging the global character of the field, we welcome papers on regional studies but encourage authors to position the work within the broader international context by reviewing and comparing findings from their regional study with studies conducted in other regions or countries whenever possible.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信