2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00477-021-01995-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Risk assessment of hot and humid environments through an integrated fuzzy AHP-VIKOR method

Abstract: Working in hot and humid environments can jeopardize the health and safety of the workers and reduce their efficiency. Different physical, environmental, and human factors can influence the risk level of working in these atmospheres. Therefore, the risk assessment of such atmospheres must be carried out from a holistic point of view. This paper aims to introduce a novel risk assessment and prioritization model, using hybrid AHP and VIKOR methods in a fuzzy environment. The AHP method was adopted to determine t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
13
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the classic MCDM tools do not take into account the risk orientations of the decision-makers, the situation arises that the model is insufficient in the face of dynamic changes 27 . Unforeseen parameters such as sudden population changes, catastrophes, unfavorable conditions due to climate change, lack of space, energy costs lead to the fact that the phenomenon that manages the uncertainty is chosen according to the behavior of risk avoidance and not loss avoidance.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Since the classic MCDM tools do not take into account the risk orientations of the decision-makers, the situation arises that the model is insufficient in the face of dynamic changes 27 . Unforeseen parameters such as sudden population changes, catastrophes, unfavorable conditions due to climate change, lack of space, energy costs lead to the fact that the phenomenon that manages the uncertainty is chosen according to the behavior of risk avoidance and not loss avoidance.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to make more rational decisions and handle uncertain environment hybrid methods are more useful and reliable tools due to well-organized and integrated solution mechanisms for required tasks such as weight evaluation, aggregated weighting, ranking of alternatives and achievement of compromise solutions in MCDM process 12 , 21 23 . The other advantages of hybrid models in multi-criteria decision problems are: Ability to use the integration of the capabilities of more than one technique to solve complex problems involving variety of information and, to transform both quantitative and qualitative data into aggregate weights to place them in a membership function 24 27 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With FVIKOR, a compromise solution is achieved with maximum group utility of the majority and minimum individual regret of the opponent (Celik et al 2021 ; Samanlioglu 2019 ). Some extensions of VIKOR in fuzziness have been merged with MCDM and applied to the risk assessment problems in recent years (Ramavandi et al 2021 ; Erdoğan et al 2021 ; Rathore et al 2021 ; Guo et al 2019 ; Gul et al 2019 ; Mete et al 2019 ; Gul and Ak 2018 ; Tian et al 2018 ; Mohsen and Fereshteh 2017 ).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The v value is crucial in ranking the alternatives (i.e., sub-watersheds). A similar analysis was conducted by (Suh et al 2019;Ramavandi et al 2021) to examine the model's applicability for decision making. From Figure 6, it is evident that SW-13, SW-17, SW-18 and SW-21 are not affected by changing values of v. Hence, it indicates the robustness of results from the model in which the risk priority of these sub-watersheds is similar to maximum group utility (S j ) and minimum individual regret (R j ).…”
Section: Sensitivity Analysis Of Mcdm Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%