A Multi-Agent System based on MCDM Approach for Multi-Modal Transportation Problem Resolution

J. Larioui, A. El Byed


In the past few years, using an advanced transportation information system (ATIS) has become essential for effective urban mobility management. These systems play an important role in the transport sector and aim to manage travelers' movements better. Users of these systems can plan their trips according to their own needs and define their preferences. However, the expression of preferences over itinerary criteria is crucial for the performance of urban mobility and has a considerable effect on the success of transport management. After all, satisfying the traveler and facilitating his travel is the first sign of effective urban mobility management. To resolve such problems, a multi-agent system should use a multi-criteria decision-making methodology (MCDM) method to find the optimal itinerary that meets the user's needs. The article presents the application of the MCDM as a multi-agent system for multimodal transportation. The system should offer an itinerary that meets the user's needs. The user could define an order of preference on the different criteria so the system will know how to calculate his itinerary. The proposed criteria are travel time, cost, number of modes changes, and safety. These criteria will simplify the evaluation of the several solutions proposed by the system in terms of utility and efficiency to meet the user's needs in terms of travel. The system contains six agents: Personnel Travel Agent PTA, Information Agent IA, Directory Selecting Agent DSA, Sorting Agent SA, Calculating Agent CA, Decision-Making Agent DMA. Therefore, The DMA agent is responsible for this process of finding the optimal itinerary.


Keywords: Multi-Agent System, multi-criteria decision making, multimodal transportation, transportation simulation, TOPSIS.

Full Text:



KWANJIRA K., HUYNH V., AMMARAPALA V., and CHAROENSIRIWATH C. A Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Approach for Selecting the Multimodal Freight Transportation Routes. In 20th International Symposium on Knowledge and Systems Sciences. Da Nang, Springer, 2019: 28–46, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1209-4_3

DZEMYDIENĖ D., BURINSKIENĖ A., and MILIAUSKAS A. Integration of Multi-Criteria Decision Support with Infrastructure of Smart Services for Sustainable Multi-Modal Transportation of Freights. Sustainability, 2021, 13(9): 1-26. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/4675#

QU L., & CHEN Y. A hybrid MCDM method for route selection of multimodal transportation network. In Advances in Neural Networks - International Symposium on Neural Networks 2008. Heidelberg, Springer, 2008: 374–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-87732-5_42

ROSTAMZADEH R., & SOFIAN S. Prioritizing effective 7Ms to improve production systems performance using fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS (case study). Expert Systems with Applications, 2011, 38: 5166–5177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.045

RAHMAN, M. A., JAUMANN L., LERCHE N., RENATUS F., BUCHS A. K., GADE R., GELDERMANN J., and SAUTER M. Selection of the best inland waterway structure: a multi-criteria decision analysis approach. Water Resources Management, 2015, 29: 2733–2749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-0967-1

MANIYA K., & BHATT M. An alternative multiple attribute decision making methodology for solving optimal facility layout design selection problems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2011, 61(3): 542–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2011.04.009

YEH C. H., DENG H., and CHANG Y. H. Fuzzy multi-criteria analysis for performance evaluation of bus companies. European Journal of Operational Research, 2000, 126(3): 459-473. https://doi.org/10.5539/cis.v3n2p252

ZAK J. The methodology of multiple criteria decision making/aiding in public transportation. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2011, 45: 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.108

HWANG C., & YOON K. Multiple attribute decision-making methods and applications. New York, Springer, 1981.

KEYVAN-EKBATANI M., & VAZIRI M. Perceived attributes in multidimensional appraisal of urban public transportation. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2012, 48: 2159-2168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1189

KEYVAN-EKBATANIA M., & ODED C. Multi-Criteria Appraisal of Multi-Modal Urban Public Transport Systems. In 18th Euro Working Group on Transportation. Delft, Delft University of Technology, 2015: 1-11. https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:9e4f5fa8-81f4-449c-acb0-0b71b015cb9a/datastream/OBJ

SIRISAWAT P., & KIATCHAROENPOL T. Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approaches to prioritizing solutions for reverse logistics barriers. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2018, 117: 303-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.01.015

MOUSAVI-NASAB S. H., & SOTOUDEH-ANVARI A. A comprehensive MCDM-based approach using TOPSIS, COPRAS and DEA as an auxiliary tool for material selection problems. Materials & Design, 2017, 121: 237-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.02.041

PATIL S. K., & KANT R. A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for ranking the solutions of Knowledge Management adoption in Supply Chain to overcome its barriers. Expert Systems with Applications, 2014, 41: 679–693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.093

SUN C.-C. A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, 37: 7745–7754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.04.066

HAN H., & TRIMI S. A fuzzy TOPSIS method for performance evaluation of reverse logistics in social commerce platforms. Expert Systems with Applications, 2018, 103: 133-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2018.03.003

KOOHATHONGSUMRIT N., & MEETHOM W. An Integrated Approach of Fuzzy Risk Assessment Model and Data Envelopment Analysis for Route Selection in Multimodal Transportation Networks. Expert Systems with Applications, 2020, 171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.114342

ZHANG Z., & GUO C. Deriving priority weights from intuitionistic multiplicative preference relations under group decision-making settings. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2018, 68(12): 1582–1599. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41274-016-0171-6

ZHANG Z., KOU X., YU W., & GUO C. On priority weights and consistency for incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations. Knowledge-Based Systems, 2017, 143: 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.12.010

CHU T.C. Facility location selection using fuzzy TOPSIS under group decisions. International Journal of Uncertainty Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 2002, 10(6): 687–701. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488502001739

CHU T. C., & LIN Y. C. A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2003, 21(4): 284–290. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s001700300033

DAGDEVIREN M., YAVUZ S., and KILINC N. Weapon selection using the AHP and TOPSIS methods under fuzzy environment. Expert Systems with Applications, 2009, 36(4): 8143–8151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.10.016

BAYKASOGLU A., & KAPLANOGLU V. A multi-agent approach to load consolidation in transportation. Advances in Engineering Software, 2011, 42(7): 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2011.03.017

AFSHAR A., MARINO M. A., SAADATPOUR M., and AFSHAR A. Fuzzy TOPSIS multi-criteria decision analysis applied to Karun reservoirs system. Water Resources Management, 2011, 25(2): 545–563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9713-x

AIELLO G., ENEA M., GALANTE G., and LA SCALIA G. Clean agent selection approached by fuzzy TOPSIS decision-making method. Fire Technology, 2009, 45(4): 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-008-0059-3

AMIRI M. P. Project selection for oil-fields development by using the AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, 37(9): 6218–6224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.02.103

HWANG C. L., & YOON K. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Heidelberg, Springer, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9

WANG X., & CHAN H. K. A hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS approach to assess improvement areas when implementing green supply chain initiatives. International Journal of Production Research, 2013, 51(10): 3117–3130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.754553

BAYKASOGLU A., & KAPLANOGLU V. and SAHIN, C. Route prioritisation in a multi-agent transportation environment via multi-attribute decision making. International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, 2016, 8(1): 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJDATS.2016.075973

LARIOUI J., & EL BYED A. A Multi-Agent Information System Architecture For Multimodal Transportation. In Embedded Systems and Artificial Intelligence Proceedings 2019. Fez, Springer, 2019: 795-803. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0947-6_75

LARIOUI J., & EL BYED A. An Advanced Intelligent Support System for Multi-modal Transportation Network Based on Multi-Agent Architecture. Advanced Intelligent Systems for Applied Computing Sciences, 2020, 4: 98-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36674-2_10

WANG J. J., JING Y.Y., ZHANG C. F., SHI G. H., and ZHANG X. T. A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model for trigeneration system. Energy Policy, 2008, 36(10): 3823-3832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.07.002

HWANG C., LAI Y., and LIU T. A new approach for multiple objective decision making. Computers and Operations Research, 1993, 20, 889-899. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(93)90109-V

LARIOUI J., & EL BYED A. Towards a Semantic Layer Design for an Advanced Intelligent Multimodal Transportation System. International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 2020, 9(2): 2471–2478. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2020/236922020

LARIOUI J., & EL BYED A. An Agent-based architecture for Multi-modal Transportation Using Prometheus Methodology Design. In Innovations in Smart Cities Applications Volume 4. New York, Springer, 2021: 325-343. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-66840-2_25

LARIOUI J., & EL BYED A. Multi-Agent System Architecture Oriented Prometheus Methodology Design for Multi modal Transportation. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering Research, 2020, 8(5): 2118-2125. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijeter/2020/105852020

KICIŃSKI M., & SOLECKA K. Application of MCDA/MCDM methods for an integrated urban public transportation system – case study, city of Cracow. Archives of Transport, 2018, 46(2): 71-84. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.2107

DRAKAKI M., GOREN H. G., and TZIONAS P. An intelligent multi-agent system using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and axiomatic design as a decision support method for refugee settlement siting. In Decision Support Systems VIII: Sustainable Data-Driven and Evidence-Based Decision Support. New York, Springer, 2018. https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/an-intelligent-multi-agent-system-using-fuzzy-analytic-hierarchy/15762716


  • There are currently no refbacks.