EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 448 (2023) E3S Web Conf., 448 (2023) 02050 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 448, 2023
The 8th International Conference on Energy, Environment, Epidemiology and Information System (ICENIS 2023)
Article Number 02050
Number of page(s) 12
Section Information System
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202344802050
Published online 17 November 2023
  1. Boone, E L, L. Kurtz D, Anwar F, Chandra Kristiaji W, Salim E. Pengantar Bisnis Jilid 2. Chandra Kristiaji W, editor. Jakarta: Jakarta Erlangga; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  2. Imron A, Mochammad H. Pengantar Bisnis Modern. 1st ed. Puspitasari A, editor. Banten: Desanta Muliavisitama; 2021. 28–34 p. [Google Scholar]
  3. Kazemi A, Amiri M. Selecting Shopping Center Site Using MADM Techniques. In: LHHSS-17, ICEELB-17, Jan 1-2, 2017 Dubai (UAE). ICEHM; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  4. Erdin C, Akbaş HE. A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for the Location Selection of Shopping Malls: A Case Study from Turkey. Sustainability. 2019 Jul 14;11(14):3837. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cheng EWL, Li H, Yu L. The analytic network process (ANP) approach to location selection: a shopping mall illustration. Construction Innovation. 2005 Jun 1;5(2):83–97. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ocampo L, Genimelo GJ, Lariosa J, Guinitaran R, Borromeo PJ, Aparente ME, et al. Warehouse location selection with TOPSIS group decision-making under different expert priority allocations. Engineering Management in Production and Services. 2020 Dec 1;12(4):22–39. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Kaplinski O, Peldschus F, Tupenaite L. Development of MCDM methods - in honour of professor Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas on the occasion of his 70th birthday. International Journal of Computers, Communications and Control. 2014 Jan 1;9(3):305–12. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Labianca C, De Gisi S, Notarnicola M. Multi-criteria decision-making. Assessing Progress Towards Sustainability. 2022 Jan 1;219–43. [Google Scholar]
  9. Meshram C, Agrawal SS. Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision Making associated with Risk and Confidence Attributes. Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics. 2015 Sep 1;4(3). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Yuksek BZ, Dakeev U. Management of Urban Parking Lot Energy Efficiency with the Application of Wind Turbine and LED lights. Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics. 2014 Mar 1;3(1). [Google Scholar]
  11. Prasetyaningrum I, Fathoni K, Priyantoro TTJ. Application of recommendation system with AHP method and sentiment analysis. TELKOMNIKA (Telecommunication Computing Electronics and Control). 2020 Jun 1;18(3):1343. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Abdulgader FS, Eid R, Rouyendegh BD. Development of decision support model for selecting a maintenance plan using a fuzzy MCDM approach: A theoretical framework. Applied Computational Intelligence and Soft Computing. 2018;2018. [Google Scholar]
  13. Roszkowska E. Rank Ordering Criteria Weighting Methods – a Comparative Overview. Optimum Studia Ekonomiczne. 2013;(5(65)):14–33. [Google Scholar]
  14. Alfares HK, Duffuaa SO. Simulation-Based Evaluation of Criteria Rank-Weighting Methods in Multi-Criteria Decision-Making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak. 2016 Jan 18;15(01):43–61. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Balbontin C, Hensher DA. Identifying the role of stated process strategies in business location decisions. Transp Res E Logist Transp Rev. 2020 Sep 1;141. [Google Scholar]
  16. Zeng Q, Zhong M, Zhu Y, Qian T, Li J. Business location planning based on a novel geo-social influence diffusion model. Inf Sci (N Y). 2021 Jun;559:61–74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Balbontin C, Hensher DA. Understanding business location decision making for transport planning: An investigation of the role of process rules in identifying influences on firm location. J Transp Geogr. 2021 Feb 1;91. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kellner F, Schroder N. Location Planning & Analysis Using Uncertain Data. In Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE); 2022. p. 720–3. [Google Scholar]
  19. Alaskar H, Vaiyapuri T, Sbai Z. Twitter Analytics for Discovering Socially Important Locations for Business Improvement. In IEEE; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  20. Vytautas B, Marija B, Vytautas P. Assessment of Neglected Areas in Vilnius City Using MCDM and COPRAS Methods. Procedia Eng. 2015;122:29–38. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kouchaksaraei RH, Zolfani SH, Golabchi M. Glasshouse Locating Based On SWARA-COPRAS Approach. International Journal of Strategic Property Management. 2015 Jun 19;19(2):111–22. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Ray A, De A, Dan PKr. Facility location selection using complete and partial ranking MCDM methods. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering. 2015;19(2):262. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Komchornrit K. The Selection of Dry Port Location by a Hybrid CFA-MACBETH-PROMETHEE Method: A Case Study of Southern Thailand. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics. 2017 Sep;33(3):141–53. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Baušys R, Juodagalvienė B. Garage location selection for residential house by WASPAS-SVNS method. Journal Of Civil Engineering And Management. 2017 Mar 2;23(3):421–9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. Karasan A, Zavadskas EK, Kahraman C, Keshavarz-Ghorabaee M. Residential Construction Site Selection Through Interval-Valued Hesitant Fuzzy CODAS Method. Informatica (Netherlands). 2019;30(4):689–710. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. AlFanatseh AA, Sababhi S. Applying GIS using location allocation models for improved spatial planning of Civil Defence Services: a Case Study of the Karak Governorate, Jordan. GeoJournal. 2023 Feb 1;88(1):691–710. [Google Scholar]
  27. Božanic D, Tešic D, Kocic J. Multi-criteria fucom -fuzzy mabac model for the selection of location for construction of single-span bailey bridge. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering. 2019 Mar 15;2(1):132–46. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. Saha A, Roy R. An integrated approach to identify suitable areas for built-up development using GIS-based multi-criteria analysis and AHP in Siliguri planning area, India. SN Appl Sci. 2021 Apr 1;3(4). [Google Scholar]
  29. Erol İ, Sencer S, Özmen A, Searcy C. Fuzzy MCDM framework for locating a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Energy Policy. 2014 Apr;67:186–97. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. Bagočius V, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z. Selecting A Location For A Liquefied Natural Gas Terminal In The Eastern Baltic Sea. Transport. 2014 Mar 25;29(1):69–74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. Fetanat A, Khorasaninejad E. A novel hybrid MCDM approach for offshore wind farm site selection: A case study of Iran. Ocean Coast Manag. 2015 Jun;109:17–28. [Google Scholar]
  32. Esmaelian M, Tavana M, Santos Arteaga FJ, Mohammadi S. A multicriteria spatial decision support system for solving emergency service station location problems. International Journal of Geographical Information Science. 2015 Jul 3;29(7):1187–213. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Gigović L, Pamučar D, Božanić D, Ljubojević S. Application of the GIS-DANP-MABAC multi-criteria model for selecting the location of wind farms: A case study of Vojvodina, Serbia. Renew Energy. 2017 Apr;103:501–21. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  34. Tavana M, Santos Arteaga FJ, Mohammadi S, Alimohammadi M. A fuzzy multi-criteria spatial decision support system for solar farm location planning. Energy Strategy Reviews. 2017 Dec;18:93–105. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. Deveci M, Canıtez F, Gökaşar I. WASPAS and TOPSIS based interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method for a selection of a car sharing station. Sustain Cities Soc. 2018 Aug;41:777–91. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Ozdemir S, Sahin G. Multi-criteria decision-making in the location selection for a solar PV power plant using AHP. Measurement. 2018 Dec;129:218–26. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  37. Kabak M, Erbaş M, Çetinkaya C, Özceylan E. A GIS-based MCDM approach for the evaluation of bike-share stations. J Clean Prod. 2018 Nov;201:49–60. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Sánchez-Lozano JM, Teruel-Solano J, Soto-Elvira PL, Socorro García-Cascales M. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods for the evaluation of solar farms locations: Case study in south-eastern Spain. Vol. 24, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. Elsevier Ltd; 2013. p. 544–56. [Google Scholar]
  39. Noorollahi Y, Yousefi H, Mohammadi M. Multi-criteria decision support system for wind farm site selection using GIS. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments. 2016 Feb 1;13:38–50. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Díaz H, Guedes Soares C. An integrated GIS approach for site selection of floating offshore wind farms in the Atlantic continental European coastline. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2020 Dec 1;134. [Google Scholar]
  41. Xu Y, Li Y, Zheng L, Cui L, Li S, Li W, et al. Site selection of wind farms using GIS and multi-criteria decision making method in Wafangdian, China. Energy. 2020 Sep 15;207. [Google Scholar]
  42. Zafar U, Bayram IS, Bayhan S. A GIS-based Optimal Facility Location Framework for Fast Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. In: IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Electronics. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.; 2021. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dehshiri SSH, Dehshiri SJH. Locating wind farm for power and hydrogen production based on Geographic information system and multi-criteria decision making method: An application. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2022; [Google Scholar]
  44. Rezaei M, Alharbi SA, Razmjoo A, Mohamed MA. Accurate location planning for a wind-powered hydrogen refueling station: Fuzzy VIKOR method. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2021 Sep 28;46(67):33360–74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  45. Moradi S, Yousefi H, Noorollahi Y, Rosso D. Multi-criteria decision support system for wind farm site selection and sensitivity analysis: Case study of Alborz Province, Iran. Energy Strategy Reviews. 2020 May;29:100478. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  46. Wei G, Lei F, Lin R, Wang R, Wei Y, Wu J, et al. Algorithms for probabilistic uncertain linguistic multiple attribute group decision making based on the GRA and CRITIC method: application to location planning of electric vehicle charging stations. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja. 2020 Jan 1;33(1):828–46. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  47. Chien F, Wang CN, Nguyen VT, Nguyen VT, Chau KY. An evaluation model of quantitative and qualitative fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making approach for hydroelectric plant location selection. Energies (Basel). 2020 Jun 1;13(11). [Google Scholar]
  48. Messaoudi D, Settou N, Negrou B, Settou B. GIS based multi-criteria decision making for solar hydrogen production sites selection in Algeria. Int J Hydrogen Energy. 2019 Dec 6;44(60):31808–31. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  49. Gao J, Guo F, Ma Z, Huang X. Multi-criteria decision-making framework for large-scale rooftop photovoltaic project site selection based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput. 2021 Apr 1;102. [Google Scholar]
  50. Türk S, Koç A, Şahin G. Multi-criteria of PV solar site selection problem using GIS-intuitionistic fuzzy based approach in Erzurum province/Turkey. Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 1;11(1). [Google Scholar]
  51. Solangi YA, Shah SAA, Zameer H, Ikram M, Saracoglu BO. Assessing the solar PV power project site selection in Pakistan: based on AHP-fuzzy VIKOR approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2019 Oct 1;26(29):30286–302. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Spyridonidou S, Vagiona DG. Spatial energy planning of offshore wind farms in Greece using GIS and a hybrid MCDM methodological approach. EuroMediterr J Environ Integr. 2020 Aug 1;5(2). [Google Scholar]
  53. Zarin R, Azmat M, Naqvi SR, Saddique Q, Ullah S. Landfill site selection by integrating fuzzy logic, AHP, and WLC method based on multi-criteria decision analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research [Internet]. 2021;28(19726–19741). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11975-7 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Rezaeisabzevar Y, Bazargan A, Zohourian B. Landfill site selection using multi criteria decision making: Influential factors for comparing locations. Vol. 93, Journal of Environmental Sciences (China). Chinese Academy of Sciences; 2020. p. 170–84. [Google Scholar]
  55. Mohsin M, Ali SA, Shamim SK, Ahmad A. A GIS-based novel approach for suitable sanitary landfill site selection using integrated fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and machine learning algorithms. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2022 May 1;29(21):31511–40. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Ali SA, Parvin F, Al-Ansari N, Pham QB, Ahmad A, Raj MS, et al. Sanitary landfill site selection by integrating AHP and FTOPSIS with GIS: a case study of Memari Municipality, India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021 Feb 1;28(6):7528–50. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Wu M. Application of urban planning and design in Yan’an new area based on GIS technology. Arabian Journal of Geosciences [Internet]. 2021;14(593). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-06911-z [Google Scholar]
  58. Alossta A, Elmansouri O, Badi I. Resolving a location selection problem by means of an integrated AHP-RAFSI approach. Reports in Mechanical Engineering. 2021;2(1):135–42. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  59. Torkayesh AE, Zolfani SH, Kahvand M, Khazaelpour P. Landfill location selection for healthcare waste of urban areas using hybrid BWM-grey MARCOS model based on GIS. Sustain Cities Soc. 2021 Apr 1;67. [Google Scholar]
  60. Popovic G, Stanujkic D, Brzakovic M, Karabasevic D. A multiple-criteria decision-making model for the selection of a hotel location. Land use policy. 2019 May;84:49–58. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  61. Zolfani SH, Mosharafiandehkordi S, Kutut V. A Pre-Planning For Hotel Locating According To The Sustainability Perspective based On BWM-WASPAS Approach. International Journal of Strategic Property Management. 2019 Sep 30;23(6):405–19. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  62. Dweiri F, Khan SA, Almulla A. A multi-criteria decision support system to rank sustainable desalination plant location criteria. Desalination. 2018 Oct;444:26–34. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  63. Rikalovic A, Cosic I, Lazarevic D. GIS based multi-criteria analysis for industrial site selection. In: Procedia Engineering. Elsevier Ltd; 2014. p. 1054–63. [Google Scholar]
  64. Kieu PT, Nguyen VT, Nguyen V, Ho TP. A Spherical Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (SF-AHP) and Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) Algorithm in Distribution Center Location Selection_ A Case Study in Agricultural Supply Chain. Axioms. 2021;10(53). [Google Scholar]
  65. Żak J, Węgliński S. The Selection of the Logistics Center Location Based on MCDM/A Methodology. Transportation Research Procedia. 2014;3:555–64. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  66. Tadić S, Zečević S, Krstić M. A novel hybrid MCDM model based on fuzzy DEMATEL, fuzzy ANP and fuzzy VIKOR for city logistics concept selection. Expert Syst Appl. 2014 Dec;41(18):8112–28. [Google Scholar]
  67. Yıldız N, Tüysüz F. A hybrid multi-criteria decision making approach for strategic retail location investment: Application to Turkish food retailing. Socioecon Plann Sci. 2019 Dec;68:100619. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  68. Fadhil RA, Prabowo EG, Redi AANP. Penentuan Lokasi Distribution Center Dengan Metode P-Median di PT Pertamina EP. Jurnal Manajemen Industri dan Logistik. 2020 Jun 9;4(1):01–9. [Google Scholar]
  69. Yazdani M, Chatterjee P, Pamucar D, Chakraborty S. Development of an integrated decision making model for location selection of logistics centers in the Spanish autonomous communities. Expert Syst Appl. 2020 Jun;148:113208. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  70. Keshavarz-Ghorabaee M. Assessment of distribution center locations using a multi-expert subjective–objective decision-making approach. Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 1;11(1). [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Quynh MP, Thu TL, Huong QD, Van APT, Van HN, Van DN. Distribution center location selection using a novel multi criteria decision-making approach under interval neutrosophic complex sets. Decision Science Letters. 2020 Jun 1;9(3):501–10. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  72. Tadic S, Krstic M, Roso V, Brnjac N. Dry port terminal location selection by applying the hybrid grey MCDM model. Sustainability (Switzerland). 2020 Sep 1;12(17). [Google Scholar]
  73. Liu P, Li Y. Multiattribute decision method for comprehensive logistics distribution center location selection based on 2-dimensional linguistic information. Inf Sci (N Y). 2020 Oct 1;538:209–44. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  74. Özmen M, Aydoğan EK. Robust multi-criteria decision making methodology for real life logistics center location problem. Artif Intell Rev. 2020 Jan 1;53(1):725–51. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  75. Budak A, Kaya İ, Karaşan A, Erdoğan M. Real-time location systems selection by using a fuzzy MCDM approach: An application in humanitarian relief logistics. Applied Soft Computing Journal. 2020 Jul 1;92. [Google Scholar]
  76. Mihajlović J, Rajković P, Petrović G, Ćirić D. The selection of the logistics distribution fruit center location based on MCDM methodology in southern and eastern region in Serbia. Operational Research in Engineering Sciences: Theory and Applications. 2019 Aug 19;2(2):72–85. [Google Scholar]
  77. Sennaroglu B, Celebi GV. A military airport location selection by AHP integrated PROMETHEE and VIKOR methods. Transp Res D Transp Environ. 2018 Mar;59:160–73. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  78. Iyer LS. AI enabled applications towards intelligent transportation. Transportation Engineering. 2021;5. [Google Scholar]
  79. Keshavarz-Ghorabaee M, Amiri M, Zavadskas EK, Turskis Z, Antucheviciene J. Determination of Objective Weights Using a New Method Based on the Removal Effects of Criteria (MEREC). Symmetry (Basel). 2021 Mar 24; [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.