Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

10 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Infrastructure management renders a number of decision-making problems from assets condition inspections to maintenance planning and resources optimisation. Since management of infrastructure pertains to not only technical requirements but also to societal and economic developments, these decision problems have multiple and often conflicting objectives. Various methods of MCDA based on the decision theory and game theory are proposed to aid-in decision-making problems. Owing to the wide area of applications and extensive variation in MCDA methodology, the selection of appropriate MCDA method pertaining to the specific needs of infrastructure management and decision maker is a difficult task. In this paper, two synthesis-based methods (i.e. AHP and MAUT) and an outranking method (i.e. ELECTRE III) is applied on same maintenance decision making problem to evaluate them for their scalability, ease of use, risk consideration, and few other aspects. The results of evaluation suggest that a) without a computerised tool the scalability of these methods is tedious task b) only MAUT considers the risk attitude of a decision maker c) AHP and MAUT both require the data to be converted to definite scale for analysis, for instance, to Saaty scale of comparison and to utility functions respectively and d) unlike other two, ELECTRE works on preference structure and yields partial pre-orders. These aforementioned results are obtained by application of AHP, MAUT, and ELECTRE III on the maintenance planning decision problem of 22 road bridges from Netherlands road network. Despite the inherent methodology differences of these methods, the result of case study shows minor difference in ranking yielded by considered MCDA methods.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationLife-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering
Subtitle of host publicationTowards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018
EditorsRobby Caspeele, Luc Taerwe, Dan M. Frangopol
PublisherCRC Press/Balkema
Pages1467-1474
Number of pages8
ISBN (Print)9781138626331
Publication statusPublished - 10 Oct 2018
Event6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018 - Ghent, Belgium
Duration: 28 Oct 201831 Oct 2018
Conference number: 6
http://www.ialcce2018.org/#/home

Conference

Conference6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018
Abbreviated titleIALCCE 2018
CountryBelgium
CityGhent
Period28/10/1831/10/18
Internet address

Fingerprint

Decision making
Scalability
Planning
Decision theory
Game theory
Inspection
Economics

Cite this

Allah Bukhsh, Z., Stipanovic, I., Hartmann, A., & Klanker, G. (2018). Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management. In R. Caspeele, L. Taerwe, & D. M. Frangopol (Eds.), Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering: Towards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018 (pp. 1467-1474). CRC Press/Balkema.
Allah Bukhsh, Z. ; Stipanovic, I. ; Hartmann, A. ; Klanker, G. / Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management. Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering: Towards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018. editor / Robby Caspeele ; Luc Taerwe ; Dan M. Frangopol. CRC Press/Balkema, 2018. pp. 1467-1474
@inproceedings{409b6b412df148f49f8dca9550c6fd36,
title = "Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management",
abstract = "Infrastructure management renders a number of decision-making problems from assets condition inspections to maintenance planning and resources optimisation. Since management of infrastructure pertains to not only technical requirements but also to societal and economic developments, these decision problems have multiple and often conflicting objectives. Various methods of MCDA based on the decision theory and game theory are proposed to aid-in decision-making problems. Owing to the wide area of applications and extensive variation in MCDA methodology, the selection of appropriate MCDA method pertaining to the specific needs of infrastructure management and decision maker is a difficult task. In this paper, two synthesis-based methods (i.e. AHP and MAUT) and an outranking method (i.e. ELECTRE III) is applied on same maintenance decision making problem to evaluate them for their scalability, ease of use, risk consideration, and few other aspects. The results of evaluation suggest that a) without a computerised tool the scalability of these methods is tedious task b) only MAUT considers the risk attitude of a decision maker c) AHP and MAUT both require the data to be converted to definite scale for analysis, for instance, to Saaty scale of comparison and to utility functions respectively and d) unlike other two, ELECTRE works on preference structure and yields partial pre-orders. These aforementioned results are obtained by application of AHP, MAUT, and ELECTRE III on the maintenance planning decision problem of 22 road bridges from Netherlands road network. Despite the inherent methodology differences of these methods, the result of case study shows minor difference in ranking yielded by considered MCDA methods.",
author = "{Allah Bukhsh}, Z. and I. Stipanovic and A. Hartmann and G. Klanker",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "10",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781138626331",
pages = "1467--1474",
editor = "Robby Caspeele and Luc Taerwe and Frangopol, {Dan M.}",
booktitle = "Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering",
publisher = "CRC Press/Balkema",

}

Allah Bukhsh, Z, Stipanovic, I, Hartmann, A & Klanker, G 2018, Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management. in R Caspeele, L Taerwe & DM Frangopol (eds), Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering: Towards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018. CRC Press/Balkema, pp. 1467-1474, 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018, Ghent, Belgium, 28/10/18.

Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management. / Allah Bukhsh, Z.; Stipanovic, I.; Hartmann, A.; Klanker, G.

Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering: Towards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018. ed. / Robby Caspeele; Luc Taerwe; Dan M. Frangopol. CRC Press/Balkema, 2018. p. 1467-1474.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

TY - GEN

T1 - Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management

AU - Allah Bukhsh, Z.

AU - Stipanovic, I.

AU - Hartmann, A.

AU - Klanker, G.

PY - 2018/10/10

Y1 - 2018/10/10

N2 - Infrastructure management renders a number of decision-making problems from assets condition inspections to maintenance planning and resources optimisation. Since management of infrastructure pertains to not only technical requirements but also to societal and economic developments, these decision problems have multiple and often conflicting objectives. Various methods of MCDA based on the decision theory and game theory are proposed to aid-in decision-making problems. Owing to the wide area of applications and extensive variation in MCDA methodology, the selection of appropriate MCDA method pertaining to the specific needs of infrastructure management and decision maker is a difficult task. In this paper, two synthesis-based methods (i.e. AHP and MAUT) and an outranking method (i.e. ELECTRE III) is applied on same maintenance decision making problem to evaluate them for their scalability, ease of use, risk consideration, and few other aspects. The results of evaluation suggest that a) without a computerised tool the scalability of these methods is tedious task b) only MAUT considers the risk attitude of a decision maker c) AHP and MAUT both require the data to be converted to definite scale for analysis, for instance, to Saaty scale of comparison and to utility functions respectively and d) unlike other two, ELECTRE works on preference structure and yields partial pre-orders. These aforementioned results are obtained by application of AHP, MAUT, and ELECTRE III on the maintenance planning decision problem of 22 road bridges from Netherlands road network. Despite the inherent methodology differences of these methods, the result of case study shows minor difference in ranking yielded by considered MCDA methods.

AB - Infrastructure management renders a number of decision-making problems from assets condition inspections to maintenance planning and resources optimisation. Since management of infrastructure pertains to not only technical requirements but also to societal and economic developments, these decision problems have multiple and often conflicting objectives. Various methods of MCDA based on the decision theory and game theory are proposed to aid-in decision-making problems. Owing to the wide area of applications and extensive variation in MCDA methodology, the selection of appropriate MCDA method pertaining to the specific needs of infrastructure management and decision maker is a difficult task. In this paper, two synthesis-based methods (i.e. AHP and MAUT) and an outranking method (i.e. ELECTRE III) is applied on same maintenance decision making problem to evaluate them for their scalability, ease of use, risk consideration, and few other aspects. The results of evaluation suggest that a) without a computerised tool the scalability of these methods is tedious task b) only MAUT considers the risk attitude of a decision maker c) AHP and MAUT both require the data to be converted to definite scale for analysis, for instance, to Saaty scale of comparison and to utility functions respectively and d) unlike other two, ELECTRE works on preference structure and yields partial pre-orders. These aforementioned results are obtained by application of AHP, MAUT, and ELECTRE III on the maintenance planning decision problem of 22 road bridges from Netherlands road network. Despite the inherent methodology differences of these methods, the result of case study shows minor difference in ranking yielded by considered MCDA methods.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063955729&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9781138626331

SP - 1467

EP - 1474

BT - Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering

A2 - Caspeele, Robby

A2 - Taerwe, Luc

A2 - Frangopol, Dan M.

PB - CRC Press/Balkema

ER -

Allah Bukhsh Z, Stipanovic I, Hartmann A, Klanker G. Evaluation and application of AHP, MAUT and ELECTRE III for infrastructure management. In Caspeele R, Taerwe L, Frangopol DM, editors, Life-Cycle Analysis and Assessment in Civil Engineering: Towards an Integrated Vision - Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE 2018. CRC Press/Balkema. 2018. p. 1467-1474