Zastosowanie metody COMET w zarządzaniu łańcuchem dostaw i logistyce

• Autorzy: Sałabun W.

Warianty tytułu

EN

Application of the COMET method in supply chain management and logistics

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

PL

Artykuł prezentuje nową rozmytą metodę wielokryterialnego wspomagania podejmowania decyzji. Metoda COMET jest alternatywnym wyborem dla metody AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE oraz PROMETHEE. Artykuł przedstawia możliwość zastosowania metody COMET w zarządzaniu łańcuchem dostaw oraz logistyce. W tym celu pokazany jest krótki przegląd literatury. Następnie szczegółowo omówiona zostaje metoda COMET. Na zakończenie artykuł przedstawia przykład zastosowania metody w prostym problemie.

EN

This paper presents a new multi-criteria decision-making method: the COMET method. This approach is an alternative for AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE or PROMETHEE methods. The paper presents the possibility of using the COMET method in supply chain management (SCM) and Logistics. For this purpose, a brief review of the literature is shown. Then the COMET method is presented in detail. At the end of the article, a simple problem is shown.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

wielokryterialne wspomaganie podejmowania decyzji; logistyka; logika rozmyta; metoda COMET

EN

multi-criteria decision-making; logistics; fuzzy logic; COMET method

• Wydawca: Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz - Poznański Instytut Technologiczny
• Czasopismo: Logistyka
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: nr 3
• Strony: 4284--4290, CD 1
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 21 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Sałabun W.

• Zachodniopomorski Uniwersytet Technologiczny w Szczecinie, Wydział Informatyki, Katedra Metod Sztucznej Inteligencji i Matematyki Stosowanej ul. Żołnierska 49, 71-210 Szczecin

Bibliografia

• 1. Awasthi A., Chauhan S.S., Goyal S.K., A multi-criteria decision making approach for location planning for urban distribution centers under uncertainty. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 53, No. 1-2, 2011, 98-109.
• 2. Bojkovic N., Anic I., Pejcic-Tarle S., One solution for cross-country transport-sustainability evaluation using a modified ELECTRE method. Ecological Economics, Vol. 69, No. 5, 2010, s. 1176–1186.
• 3. Chamodrakas I., Alexopoulou N., Martakos D., Customer evaluation for order acceptance using a novel class of fuzzy methods based on TOPSIS. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 4, 2009, s. 7409-7415.
• 4. Chan F. T., Kumar N., Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2007, s. 417-431.
• 5. Chu, T.-C. Facility location selection using fuzzy topsis under group decisions. International Journal of Uncertainty. Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 10, No. 6, 2002, s. 687-701.
• 6. Ertgrul I., Karakasoglu N., Comparision of fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS mewthods for facility location selection. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 39 (2008), 783-795.
• 7. Farahani R.Z., Asgari N., Combination of MCDM and covering techniques in a hierarchical model for facility location: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 176, No. 3, 2007, s. 1839-1858.
• 8. Kannan G., Khodaverdi R., Jafarian A., A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 47, 2013, s. 345–354.
• 9. Martín, J. M., Fajardo, W., Blanco, A., and Requena, I. Constructing linguistic versions for the multicriteria decision support systems preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation i and ii. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 18 (2003), 711-731.
• 10. Onut S., Kara S.S., Isik E., Long term supplier selection using a combined fuzzy MCDM approach: A case study for a telecommunication company. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2009, s. 3887-3895.
• 11. Poh K.L., Ang B.W., Transportation fuels and policy for Singapore: an AHP planning approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 37, No. 3, 1999, s. 507-525.
• 12. Sałabun W. Application of the Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Method to Identify Nonlinear Decision Models, International Journal of Computer Applications, 89(15): 1-6, 2014.
• 13. Sałabun W., The use of Fuzzy logic to evaluate the nonlinearity of human multi-criteria used in decision making, Przegląd Elektrotechniczny, 88, 10b, 235–238, 2012
• 14. Sałabun, W. Reduction in the Number of Comparisons Required to Create Matrix of Expert Judgment in the Comet Method. Management and Production Engineering Review, 5(3); 62-69, 2014
• 15. Sałabun, W. The Characteristic Objects Method: A New Distance‐based Approach to Multicriteria Decision‐making Problems. Journal of Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis, 22(1-2), 2015: 37-50.
• 16. Tabari M., Kaboli A., Aryanezhad M.B., Shahanaghi K., Siadat A., A new method for location selection: A hybrid analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, Vol. 206, No. 2, 2008, s. 598-606.
• 17. Tuzkaya G., Onut S., Tuzkaya U.R., Gulsun B., An analytic network process approach for locating undesirable facilities: An example from Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 88, No. 4, 2008, s. 970-983.
• 18. Wey W.M., Wu K.Y., Using ANP priorities with goal programming in resource allocation in transportation. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 46, No. 7-8, 2007, s. 985-1000.
• 19. Zadeh LA., Fuzzy sets, in Information and Control, vol. 8, issue 3: 338–353, 1965
• 20. Żak J., Redmer A., Sawicki P., Multiple Objective Optimization of the Fleet Sizing Problem for Road Freight Transportation. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 45, No 4, 20011, s. 321-347
• 21. Żak J.: Wielokryterialne wspomaganie decyzji w transporcie drogowym. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Poznańskiej, 2005