Assessment of Fuzzification Effect of AHP and TOPSIS in Site Selection of Roadside EMS Stations

INTRODUCTION: In order to prevent and reduce the death and disability rates caused by road accidents, it is necessary to optimize the location of the roadside emergency medical service (EMS) stations. Optimal selection of the EMS stations is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem and usually involves the analysis of a large number of possible options and evaluation criteria. Nowadays, various MCDM methods are used to solve location problems that may generate different results. The fuzzification of these methods has always been one of the controversial issues with many agreements and disagreements. METHODS: In this study, a review was first performed on the weighting methods including five non-fuzzy weighting methods as row sum, column sum, arithmetic mean, geometric mean, and eigenvalues as well as two fuzzy weighting methods including: “Liu and Chen method” and “Chang Method”. Then, the fuzzy and non-fuzzy MCDM methods [including analytic hierarchy process (AHP), fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) Chang, FAHP Liu, Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and fuzzy TOPSIS (FTOPSIS)] were employed to locate the roadside EMS stations. Due to insufficient information and all the required layers in Iran, the information of the Interstate-65 (I-65) Highway between Montgomery and Birmingham, Alabama, USA was used in the present study. Finally, the results of these methods were compared using the mean-score, Borda, and Copeland prioritization strategies. FINDINGS: Given the importance and sensitivity of the issue, a combination of the MCDM methods was utilized to locate the EMS stations and the most appropriate non-fuzzy and fuzzy weighting methods were identified and the methods used were compared in terms of complexity, volume and time of computations, and the level of impact of the expert opinion. CONCLUSION: The AHP, FAHP Liu and Chen, FAHP Chang, and TOPSIS methods yielded more reliable results in locating the roadside EMS stations, in addition, using FTOPSIS fuzzy method was more risky and is not recommended. The non-fuzzy AHP method was identified to be the most reliable method in the present study.

[1]  Mark S. Daskin,et al.  A Hierarchical Objective Set Covering Model for Emergency Medical Service Vehicle Deployment , 1981 .

[2]  M. Niknejad,et al.  Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism using MCDM methods and GIS: case study - Lorestan province, Iran. , 2014 .

[3]  L. Zadeh.  Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility , 1999 .

[4]  Chung-Min Wu,et al.  A Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision Making Model for Supplier Selection , 2013 .

[5]  Serhat Burmaoglu,et al.  A fuzzy hybrid MCDM approach for professional selection , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[6]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[7]  W. Pedrycz,et al.  A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory , 1983 .

[8]  Shahnaz Danesh,et al.  A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach for desalination process selection , 2013 .

[9]  Abbas Alimohammadi,et al.  Hospital site selection using fuzzy AHP and its derivatives. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[10]  Ernest H. Forman,et al.  Promoting shared health care decision making using the analytic hierarchy process , 1999 .

[11]  S. Vinodh,et al.  Integrated Fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS for selecting the best plastic recycling method: A case study , 2014 .

[12]  D. Chang.  Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP , 1996 .

[13]  P. Bonacich.  Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification , 1972 .

[14]  Jaroslav Ramík,et al.  Inconsistency of pair-wise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements based on geometric mean , 2010, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[15]  R. Yusuff,et al.  An integration of a hybrid modified TOPSIS with a PGP model for the supplier selection with interdependent criteria , 2013 .

[16]  Martin Sauter,et al.  A new spatial multi-criteria decision support tool for site selection for implementation of managed aquifer recharge. , 2012, Journal of environmental management.

[17]  Jeffrey Shelton,et al.  Integrated Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Method to Prioritize Transportation Projects , 2010 .

[18]  Kirti Peniwati,et al.  Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  Yunna Wu,et al.  A hybrid fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for performance analysis and evaluation of park-level integrated energy system , 2019, Energy Conversion and Management.

[20]  Madjid Tavana,et al.  A hybrid fuzzy group decision support framework for advanced-technology prioritization at NASA , 2013, Expert Syst. Appl..

[21]  Richard F. Hartl,et al.  Heuristic Solution of an Extended Double-Coverage Ambulance Location Problem for Austria , 2005 .

[22]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation , 1990 .

[23]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications - A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[24]  Robert LIN,et al.  NOTE ON FUZZY SETS , 2014 .

[25]  Hideki Aoyama,et al.  A hybrid approach for fuzzy multi-attribute decision making in machine tool selection with consideration of the interactions of attributes , 2014, Expert Syst. Appl..

[26]  Kèyù Zhü,et al.  Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[27]  Limin Yang,et al.  Development of a 2001 National land-cover database for the United States , 2004 .

[28]  Manuel D. Rossetti,et al.  Multi-objective analysis of hospital delivery systems , 2001 .

[29]  Ali Mansour Khaki,et al.  Integration of GIS and analytical hierarchy process method for locating road emergency medical services station , 2015 .

[30]  Ya Ching Liu,et al.  A new approach for application of rock mass classification on rock slope stability assessment , 2007 .

[31]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  Implementing an extension of the analytical hierarchy process using ordered weighted averaging operators with fuzzy quantifiers in ArcGIS , 2008, Comput. Geosci..

[32]  Shaozhong Kang,et al.  Determination of comprehensive quality index for tomato and its response to different irrigation treatments , 2011 .

[33]  Abbas Toloie-Eshlaghy,et al.  MCDM Methodologies and Applications: A Literature Review from 1999 to 2009 , 2011 .

[34]  Abit Balin,et al.  Fuzzy multicriteria selection among cogeneration systems: A real case application , 2013 .

[35]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  On the invalidity of fuzzifying numerical judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2007, Math. Comput. Model..

[36]  G. Nagarajan,et al.  Selection of best biodiesel blend for IC engines: an integrated approach with FAHP-TOPSIS and FAHP-VIKOR , 2013 .