China Safety Science Journal ›› 2024, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (4): 226-231.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.0310
• Emergency technology and management • Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHOU Qingchao(
), YE Chunming**(
), GENG Xiuli
Received:2023-10-13
Revised:2024-01-22
Online:2024-04-28
Published:2024-10-28
Contact:
YE Chunming
CLC Number:
ZHOU Qingchao, YE Chunming, GENG Xiuli. Evaluation of emergency logistics facility location plan based on IT2F-BWM-MABAC method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4): 226-231.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.cssjj.com.cn/EN/10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.04.0310
Tab.1
Semantic scales corresponding to IT2F
| 量化值 | 具体说明 |
|---|---|
| ((0,0,1;1), (0,0,0.5;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 强烈劣于属性Cj |
| ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 明显劣于属性Cj |
| ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 稍微劣于属性Cj |
| ((3,5,7;1) (4,5,6;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 与属性Cj同等重要 |
| ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 稍微优于属性Cj |
| ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 明显优于属性Cj |
| ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) | 表示属性Ci 强烈优于属性Cj |
Tab.3
Description of emergency logistics facility attributes
| 属性 | 属性描述 |
|---|---|
| 设施建筑结构坚固C1 | 应急物流设施的建筑结构应该坚固可靠,能够承受灾害带来的冲击和压力 |
| 交通便利程度C2 | 应急物流设施应该位于交通便利的地方,以保证物资的快速运输 |
| 基础设施C3 | 应急物流设施应该有稳定的供水、供电等基础设施,以保证设施运行的连续性 |
| 面积充足C4 | 应急物流设施需要充足的面积,以储存大量的物资和设备 |
| 距离灾害区域较远C5 | 应急物流设施应该远离可能受到影响的灾害区域,以免设施也受到影响 |
| 周边环境安全C6 | 应急物流设施周边环境应该安全稳定,以保证设施运行的安全性 |
Tab.4
Comparison information of various site selection attributes in BWM
| Ci | 最优属性C2 | 最劣属性C6 |
|---|---|---|
| C1 | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) |
| C2 | ((3,5,7;1) (4,5,6;0.5)) | ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) |
| C3 | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) |
| C4 | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) |
| C5 | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) |
| C6 | ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1) (4,5,6;0.5)) |
Tab.6
Evaluation information of interval type II fuzzy schemes provided by expert group
| 选址方案 | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1), (4,5,6;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((0,0,1;1), (0,0,0.5;0.5)) |
| X2 | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1), (4,5,6;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1), (4,5,6;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) |
| X3 | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) |
| X4 | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1), (4,5,6;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | ((3,5,7;1), (4,5,6;0.5)) |
Tab.10
Distance matrix between weighted decision matrix and boundary approximation region decision matrix
| 选址方案 | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1 | 0.0247 | 0.022 | 0.024 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| X2 | -0.045 | 0.022 | -0.028 | 0.002 | -0.002 | 0.004 |
| X3 | -0.035 | 0.022 | 0.024 | -0.024 | -0.002 | 0. 496 |
| X4 | 0.062 | -0.063 | -0.016 | 0.023 | -0. 33 | -0.012 |
Tab.12
AHP evaluation matrix
| Ci | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 1 | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1/((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1/((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | 1/((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | 1/((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) |
| C2 | 1/((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1 | 1/((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | 1/((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | 1/((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | 1/((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) |
| C3 | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | 1 | 1/((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1/((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | 1/((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) |
| C4 | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1 | 1/((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1/((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) |
| C5 | ((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1 | 1/((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) |
| C6 | ((7,9,10;1), (8,9,9.5;0.5)) | ((9,10,10;1), (9.5,10,10;0.5)) | 1/((5,7,9;1), (6,7,8;0.5)) | ((1,3,5;1), (2,3,4;0.5)) | ((0,1,3;1), (0.5,1,2;0.5)) | 1 |
Tab.13
Defuzzification of interval type II fuzzy sets in the AHP evaluation matrix
| Ci | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 1 | 1.083 | 1/1.083 | 1/2.750 | 1/6.750 | 1/8.540 |
| C2 | 1/1.083 | 1 | 1/2.750 | 1/6.750 | 1/8.54 | 1/9.667 |
| C3 | 1.083 | 2.750 | 1 | 1/1.083 | 1/2.750 | 1/6.750 |
| C4 | 2.750 | 6.750 | 1.083 | 1 | 1/1.083 | 1/2.750 |
| C5 | 6.750 | 8.540 | 2.750 | 1.083 | 1 | 1/1.083 |
| C6 | 8.540 | 9.667 | 1/6.75 | 2.750 | 1.083 | 1 |
| [1] |
闫森, 齐金平. 考虑需求不确定的多级应急物流设施选址研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2022, 31(9):7-13.
doi: 10.12005/orms.2022.0278 |
|
doi: 10.12005/orms.2022.0278 |
|
| [2] |
谷玲玲, 耿秀丽. IIF-ER方法在应急物流设施选址中的应用[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(9):183-188.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.09.031 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2018.09.031 |
|
| [3] |
邝雨婕, 赵佳虹. 连续时变风险下危险品储运选址-选线问题[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(4):185-191.
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.04.027 |
|
doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.04.027 |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
王恒, 姚艳霞, 于姗姗, 等. 基于区间二型模糊超效率SBM模型的燃煤发电企业碳减排效率评估研究[J]. 热力发电, 2022, 51(1):69-78.
|
|
|
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
金腾宇, 耿秀丽, 章慧慧, 等. 基于犹豫模糊BWM与MOORA的多属性决策方法[J]. 机械设计与研究, 2021, 37(5):1-5.
|
|
|
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [1] | Tang Haizhou, Gong Huadong, Chen Zhilong, Zhao Xudong, Sun Yangyang, Wang Fei. Vulnerability assessment of airport runways under deliberate attacks [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(5): 279-286. |
| [2] | Wang Haijun, Zhang Yue. Scenario construction and risk analysis of confined space operations based on Bayesian networks [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(5): 38-47. |
| [3] | Wang Rui, Zhang Xun, Deng Xianghui, Wang Ping'an, Wang Xu, Zhang Wei. Resilience assessment and prediction of metro shield tunnels under explosive conditions [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 123-131. |
| [4] | Song Yinghua, Xu Hongqian, Sang Xiaoyan. Construction and analysis of a unitary scenario for cascading evolution of emergencies [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 184-193. |
| [5] | Zhao Chenyang. Evaluation and empirical research on support capability of emergency resources for major disasters oriented to sustainable development [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 220-227. |
| [6] | Yang Yuexiang, Liu Xuewen, Tu Xinyu, Zheng Huaicheng, Xu Yingcheng. Quality and safety risk analysis of intelligent consumer products based on LLMs and KG [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 271-280. |
| [7] | Wang Qian, Tong Xinru, Yang Angbin, Tong Ruipeng. Configurational paths and enhancement strategies for risk cognitive ability of enterprise safety professionals [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(4): 49-56. |
| [8] | LI Zhijian, SHE Jianjun, LU Cong, GUO Zihao, ZHOU Yilun. Evaluation of emergency management capability for construction safety accidents based on FRAM-BN [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(2): 199-208. |
| [9] | WANG Shangang, YU Qunzhou, YU Jingju. Safety evaluation and control of shield tunnel underpass buildings based on entropy weight cloud model [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2026, 36(2): 262-270. |
| [10] | LI Xiteng, MA Haitao, YU Zhengxing, ZHOU Yanfeng, LI Xikun. Research on construction and application of an intelligent risk management model for urban building collapse [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(S2): 189-195. |
| [11] | LYU Jing, REN Zixin, FAN Hanwen, CHANG Zheng. Risk evaluation model of accidents in key marine areas using tree augmented naive Bayesian network [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(12): 172-179. |
| [12] | LEI Bin, LI Yujin, LI Na, LIU Wei, LUO Linlin, LEI Dongbo. Location optimization of metro subway emergency rescue stations considering node importance [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(11): 207-219. |
| [13] | HUANG Xian, JI Tao, DENG Shejun, YU Shijun, ZHU Yunqiang, SHAO Jinliang. Operational resilience measurement and spatio-temporal evolution analysis of urban bus systems [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(10): 166-173. |
| [14] | CHEN Chong, TAN Ruipu, ZHANG Wende. Research on emergency decision-making method for online public opinion on emergency events based on probabilistic linguistic term sets [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(10): 230-238. |
| [15] | CHEN Dachuan, DUAN Xiaofeng, CHEN Mingsi, WEN Zhengdong, SHI Jinsong. Structural safety evaluation of commercial buildings in operation andmaintenance phase based on combined empowerment and improved TOPSIS [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(10): 140-148. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||