Comparison of selected railway lines in Poland using the analytical hierarchy process method

• Autorzy: Kamiński Wojciech

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.20858/sjsutst.2020.108.7

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The volume of passenger and freight transport on a given railway line depends on many socio-economic factors. Therefore, before starting an investment on a railway line, various analyses are carried out regarding the choice of the line and the scope of works. This article presents the calculation of weights determining the impact of specific socio-economic factors on the volume of rail passenger and freight transport using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. Thereafter, a comparison was made of 12 railway lines located in various regions of Poland in terms of their use in both passenger and freight transport. Half of the analysed railway lines are main lines, while the other part are local lines. The comparison made it possible to arrange the selected lines regardless of their category.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

railway transport; passenger transport; freight transport; AHP method; logistics

PL

transport kolejowy; transport pasażerski; transport towarowy; metoda AHP; logistyka

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Transport / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: z. 108
• Strony: 73--84
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 18 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Kamiński Wojciech

• Faculty of Transport and Aviation Engineering, The Silesian University of Technology, Krasińskiego 8 Street, 40-019 Katowice, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Cejka J., M. Telecky. 2019. “Influence of Economic and Political Factors on the Public Rail Transport”. Communications - Scientific Letters of the University of Zilina (Komunikacie) 21(2): 13-17.
• 2. Deng Xinyang, Deng Yong. 2019. „D-AHP method with different credibility of information”. Soft Computing. 23(2): 683-691. ISSN: 1433-7479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-017-2993-9.
• 3. Deng Xinyang, Hu Yong, Deng Yong, Mahadevan Sankaran. 2014. „Supplier selection using AHP methodology extended by D numbers”. Expert Systems with Applications 41(1): 156-167. ISSN: 0957-4174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.018.
• 4. Dong Yucheng, Zhang Guiqing, Hong Wei-Chiang, Xu Yinfeng. 2010. „Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method”. Decision Support Systems 49(3): 281-289. ISSN: 0167-9236. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.03.003.
• 5. Gaudenzi Barbara, Antonio Borghesi. 2006. „Managing risks in the supply chain using the AHP method”. The International Journal of Logistics and Management 17(1): 114-136. ISSN: 0957-4093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09574090610663464.
• 6. Ishizaka Alessio, Ashraf Labib. 2011. „Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process”. Expert Systems with Applications 38(11): 14336-14345. ISSN: 0957-4174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143.
• 7. Ishizaka Alessio, Craig Pearman, Philippe Nemery. 2012. „AHPSort: an AHP-based method for sorting problems”. International Journal of Production Research 50(17): 4767-4784. ISSN: 1366-588X. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.657966.
• 8. Jacyna-Gołda Ilona, Mariusz Izdebski, Emilian Szczepanski. 2016. „Assessment of the method effectiveness for choosing the location of warehouses in the supply network”. Challenge of Transport Telematics, TST 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science 640: 84-97.
• 9. Jacyna-Gołda Ilona, Mariusz Wasiak, Mariusz Izdebski, Konrad Lewczuk, Roland Jachimowski, Dariusz Pyza. 2016. „The evaluation of the efficiency of supply chain configuration”. Proceedings of the 20th International Scientific Conference Transport Means 2016. Transport Means - Proceedings of the International Conference: 953-957.
• 10. Jaskowski Piotr, Slawomir Biruk, Robert Bucon. 2010. „Assessing contractor selection criteria weights with fuzzy AHP method application in group decision environment”. Automation in Construction 19(2): 120-126. ISSN: 0926-5805. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.12.014.
• 11. Kou Gang, Lin Changsheng. 2014. „A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP”. European Journal of Operational Research 235(1): 225-232. ISSN: 0377-2217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.10.019.
• 12. Nosal Katarzyna, Katarzyna Solecka. 2014. „Application of AHP method for multicriteria evaluation of variants of the integration of urban public transport”. Transportation Research Procedia 3: 269-278. ISSN: 2352-1465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2014.10.006.
• 13. Ogólnopolska Baza Kolejowa. “Railmap – mapa kolejowa”. Avaliable at: https://www.bazakolejowa.pl/index.php?dzial=mapa#6/52.000/18.000. [In Polish: Nationwide Railway Base].
• 14. Peng Yi, Kou Gang, Wang Guoxun, Wu Wenshuai. 2011. „Ensemble of software defect predictors: an AHP-based evaluation method”. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 10(1): 187-206. ISSN: 1793-6845. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622011004282.
• 15. Russo Rosaria de F.S.M., Camanho Roberto. 2015. „Criteria in AHP: A Systematic Review of Literature”. Procedia Computer Science 55: 1877-0509. ISSN: 1063-6706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.081.
• 16. Sivilevicius Henrikas, Maskeliunaite Lijana. 2010. „The criteria for identifying the quality of passengers transportation by railway and their ranking using AHP method”. Transport 25(4): 368-381. ISSN: 1648-3480. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2010.46.
• 17. Xu Zeshui, Liao Huchang. 2014. „Intuitionistic Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process”. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 22(4): 749-761. ISSN: 1063-6706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2272585.
• 18. Żurek Jan, Olaf Ciszak, Robert Cieślak, Marcin Suszyński. 2011. „Ocena i wybór robota przemysłowego metodą AHP”. Archiwum Technologii Maszyn i Automatyzacji 31(2): 201-211. ISSN: 2450-9469. [In Polish: „Assessment and choice of an industrial robot with the use of AHP method”. Archives of Mechanical Technology and Materials].