IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i17p12844-d1224634.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Interactive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Autonomous Vehicles and Distributed Resources Based on Logistic Systems: Challenges for a Sustainable Future

Author

Listed:
  • Abduallah Gamal

    (Faculty of Computers and Informatics, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt)

  • Mohamed Abdel-Basset

    (Faculty of Computers and Informatics, Zagazig University, Zagazig 44519, Egypt)

  • Ibrahim M. Hezam

    (Department of Statistics & Operations Research, College of Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia)

  • Karam M. Sallam

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, School of IT and Systems, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia)

  • Ibrahim A. Hameed

    (Department of ICT and Natural Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), 7034 Ålesund, Norway)

Abstract

The autonomous vehicle (AV) is one of the emerging technologies of the new age that has the potential to restructure transportation infrastructure. AVs are able to sense their surroundings and move around with control and self-sufficiency. AVs can contribute towards reducing traffic congestion on the roads, improving the quality of life, and achieving the highest levels of traffic safety. Thus, this type of vehicle can be integrated into the logistics industry. Due to the presence of several AVs, selecting a standard and efficient AV for logistics planning is a great challenge. The selection of an AV depends on many conflicting and essential criteria. Given its efficiency and reliability in dealing with conflicting criteria, a comprehensive multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach was applied to solve the problem of selecting the optimal AV. However, the MCDM selection process is based on human judgment, which can be ambiguous. Accordingly, uncertainty was handled using type-2 neutrosophic numbers (T2NN). Initially, the method based on the removal effects of criteria (MEREC) was extended under T2NN and employed to assess and prioritize criteria. Then, the combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method was extended under T2NN and applied to rank the candidate substitutions. To confirm the feasibility of the applied approach, an illustrative case study of four AVs was introduced. A sensitivity analysis was performed by changing the weights of the criteria and some other parameters to confirm the validity and stability of the proposed approach. In addition, a comparison analysis with other MCDM approaches was conducted to show the effectiveness and reliability of the applied approach. This research provides useful information for policymakers in the field of logistics. Finally, the results indicate that the velocity of AVs criterion is the most influential criterion in the selection of an intelligent AV.

Suggested Citation

  • Abduallah Gamal & Mohamed Abdel-Basset & Ibrahim M. Hezam & Karam M. Sallam & Ibrahim A. Hameed, 2023. "An Interactive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Autonomous Vehicles and Distributed Resources Based on Logistic Systems: Challenges for a Sustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-26, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12844-:d:1224634
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12844/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/17/12844/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mladen Krstić & Giulio Paolo Agnusdei & Pier Paolo Miglietta & Snežana Tadić & Violeta Roso, 2022. "Applicability of Industry 4.0 Technologies in the Reverse Logistics: A Circular Economy Approach Based on COmprehensive Distance Based RAnking (COBRA) Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, May.
    2. Raj, Alok & Kumar, J. Ajith & Bansal, Prateek, 2020. "A multicriteria decision making approach to study barriers to the adoption of autonomous vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 122-137.
    3. Morteza Yazdani & Pascale Zaraté & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2019. "A Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems," Post-Print hal-02879091, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Su, Dan & Zhang, Lijun & Peng, Hua & Saeidi, Parvaneh & Tirkolaee, Erfan Babaee, 2023. "Technical challenges of blockchain technology for sustainable manufacturing paradigm in Industry 4.0 era using a fuzzy decision support system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    2. Qian, Lixian & Yin, Juelin & Huang, Youlin & Liang, Ya, 2023. "The role of values and ethics in influencing consumers’ intention to use autonomous vehicle hailing services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Kassens-Noor, Eva & Kotval-Karamchandani, Zeenat & Cai, Meng, 2020. "Willingness to ride and perceptions of autonomous public transit," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 92-104.
    4. Zhi Wen & Huchang Liao & Ruxue Ren & Chunguang Bai & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Abdullah Al-Barakati, 2019. "Cold Chain Logistics Management of Medicine with an Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Mehmet Ozcalici, 2023. "Integrating queue theory and multi-criteria decision-making tools for selecting roll-over car washing machine," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(2), pages 99-119.
    6. Željko Stević & Dillip Kumar Das & Rade Tešić & Marijo Vidas & Dragan Vojinović, 2022. "Objective Criticism and Negative Conclusions on Using the Fuzzy SWARA Method in Multi-Criteria Decision Making," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Yafeng Han & Tetiana Shevchenko & Bernard Yannou & Meisam Ranjbari & Zahra Shams Esfandabadi & Michael Saidani & Ghada Bouillass & Kseniia Bliumska-Danko & Guohou Li, 2023. "Exploring How Digital Technologies Enable a Circular Economy of Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Manivasakan, Hesavar & Kalra, Riddhi & O'Hern, Steve & Fang, Yihai & Xi, Yinfei & Zheng, Nan, 2021. "Infrastructure requirement for autonomous vehicle integration for future urban and suburban roads – Current practice and a case study of Melbourne, Australia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 36-53.
    9. Sood, Kirti & Singh, Simarjeet & Behl, Abhishek & Sindhwani, Rahul & Kaur, Sandeepa & Pereira, Vijay, 2023. "Identification and prioritization of the risks in the mass adoption of artificial intelligence-driven stable coins: The quest for optimal resource utilization," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    10. Raghunathan Krishankumar & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur Soundarapandian Ravichandran, 2023. "A Novel Integrated q-Rung Fuzzy Framework for Biomass Location Selection with No Apriori Weight Choices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Saverio Ferraro & Alessandra Cantini & Leonardo Leoni & Filippo De Carlo, 2023. "Sustainable Logistics 4.0: A Study on Selecting the Best Technology for Internal Material Handling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, April.
    12. Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Raghunathan Krishankumar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Kattur S. Ravichandran, 2021. "A Hesitant Fuzzy Combined Compromise Solution Framework-Based on Discrimination Measure for Ranking Sustainable Third-Party Reverse Logistic Providers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    13. Cui, Yongfeng & Liu, Wei & Rani, Pratibha & Alrasheedi, Melfi, 2021. "Internet of Things (IoT) adoption barriers for the circular economy using Pythagorean fuzzy SWARA-CoCoSo decision-making approach in the manufacturing sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    14. Nadine Kafa & Anicia Jaegler & Joseph Sarkis, 2020. "Harnessing Corporate Sustainability Decision-Making Complexity: A Field Study of Complementary Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Jen Sim Ho & Booi Chen Tan & Teck Chai Lau & Nasreen Khan, 2023. "Public Acceptance towards Emerging Autonomous Vehicle Technology: A Bibliometric Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Erdogan, Nuh & Pamucar, Dragan & Kucuksari, Sadik & Deveci, Muhammet, 2021. "An integrated multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making model for optimal planning of workplace charging stations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    17. Hosseini, Shahab & Lawal, Abiodun Ismail & Kwon, Sangki, 2023. "A causality-weighted approach for prioritizing mining 4.0 strategies integrating reliability-based fuzzy cognitive map and hybrid decision-making methods: A case study of Nigerian Mining Sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    18. Kumar, Girish & James, Ajith Tom & Choudhary, Krishna & Sahai, Rishi & Song, Weon Keun, 2022. "Investigation and analysis of implementation challenges for autonomous vehicles in developing countries using hybrid structural modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    19. Bouraima, Mouhamed Bayane & Qiu, Yanjun & Stević, Željko & Simić, Vladimir, 2023. "Assessment of alternative railway systems for sustainable transportation using an integrated IRN SWARA and IRN CoCoSo model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    20. Rosell, Jordi & Allen, Jaime, 2020. "Test-riding the driverless bus: Determinants of satisfaction and reuse intention in eight test-track locations," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 166-189.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:17:p:12844-:d:1224634. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.