Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The on-time performance of a ship is one of the major aspects of a ship’s operational reliability. The establishment of proper benchmarking for it would help the ship’s stakeholders to a considerable extent with respect to enhancement of the performance. This paper investigates and suggests a methodology for selection of a ship as a point of reference, so that improvement in the on-time performance of other ships could be achieved. The issue is addressed through comparative studies of ships, exclusively from an on-time performance viewpoint. The paper proposes a structure that would guide the development of a support system for improvement in the operational reliability of a ship. The on-time performance of a ship is expressed in terms of 12 primary attributes signifying the diverse aspects of its operational reliability. Four ships of like characteristics voyaging between Singapore and Japan are considered for the study and an assessor’s objective and subjective responses to the attributes are collected for these ships. The fuzzy analytical hierarchy process is used to allot priority weights to all the attributes, and then an evidential reasoning procedure is applied to obtain the utility values of the ships. Based on the utility values, comparison is carried out and the best of the four ships is selected as the reference ship for the marine sector under investigation. The proposed framework would be useful for enhancement of the ship’s operational efficiency, reliability and performance. It would also help the ship’s stakeholders in terms of better scheduling and proper management of the ship’s arrival at the destination harbour.

Keywords

On-time performance fuzzy analytical hierarchy process evidential reasoning methodology utility values benchmarking

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Xie

Yang

. Ship selection using a multiple-criteria synthesis approach. J Mar Sci Technol 2008; 13(1): 50–62.

Wang

Yang

Chin

. The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees. Eur J Opl Res, 2006; 175(1): 35–66.

Yang

. Nonlinear information aggregation via evidential reasoning in multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics Part A: Systems Hum 2002; 32(3): 376–393.

Olcer

. A hybrid approach for multi-objective combinatorial optimisation problems in ship design and shipping. Comput Ops Res 2008; 35(9): 2760–2775.

Senna

. The influence of travel-time variability on the value of time. Transportation 1994; 21(2): 203–228.

Noland

Polak

. Travel time variability: a review of theoretical and empirical issues. Transp Rev 2002; 22(1): 39–54.

Campos

VBG

da Silva

PAL

. A method for evaluating the operational reliability of a transportation network. In: 2nd international symposium on transportation network reliability, Christchurch, New Zealand and Queenstown, 20–24 August 2004, pp. 218–223. New Providence, NJ: BPR Publishers.

Al-Deek

Emam

. Computing travel time reliability in transportation networks with multistates and dependent link failures. J Comput Civil Engng 2006; 20(5): 317–327.

Nam

Park

Khamkongkhun

. Estimation of value of travel time reliability. J Advd Transpn 2005; 39(1): 39–61.

10.

Hollander

Liu

. Estimation of the distribution of travel times by repeated simulation. Transpn Res Part C: Emerging Technol 2008; 16(2): 212–231.

11.

Zheng

McDonald

. Estimation of travel time using fuzzy clustering method. IET Intell Transp Systems 2009; 3(1): 77–86.

12.

Chang

. Assessing travel time reliability in transport appraisal. J Transp Geogr 2010; 18(3): 419–425.

13.

Fosgerau

Karlstrom

. The value of reliability. Transpn Res Part B: Methodol 2010; 44(1): 38–49.

14.

Ettema

Timmermans

. Costs of travel time uncertainty and benefits of travel time information: conceptual model and numerical examples. Transpn Res Part C: Emerging Technol 2006; 14(5): 335–350.

15.

Fan

Nie

. Optimal routing for maximizing the travel time reliability. Networks Spatial Econ 2006; 6(3–4): 333–344.

16.

Tzannatos

. Technical reliability of the Greek coastal passenger fleet. Mar Policy 2005; 29(1): 85–92.

17.

Margulici

Ban

. Benchmarking travel time estimates. IET Intell Transp Systems 2008; 2(3): 228–237.

18.

Innamaa

. Short-term prediction of travel time using neural networks on an interurban highway. Transportation 2005; 32(6): 649–669.

19.

El Faouzi

N-E

Billot

Bouzebda

. Motorway travel time prediction based on toll data and weather effect integration. IET Intell Transpn Systems 2010; 4(4): 338–345.

20.

Yang

Liu

You

. The reliability of travel time forecasting. IEEE Trans Intell Transpn Systems 2010; 11(1): 162–171.

21.

Kahraman

. Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: theory and applications with recent developments. New York: Springer, 2008.

22.

Prabhu Gaonkar

Srividya

Phadke

. Fuzzy AHP for ranking condition monitoring techniques. In: International conference on operations research applications in engineering and management, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India, 27–29 May 2009, pp. 2265–2281. Tiruchirappalli, India: Anna University Tiruchirappalli.

23.

Che

Wang

Chuang

. A fuzzy AHP and DEA approach for making bank loan decisions for small and medium enterprises in Taiwan. Expert Systems Applic 2010; 37(10): 7189–7199.

24.

Chen

Wang

. The use of a hybrid fuzzy–Delphi–AHP approach to develop global business intelligence for information service firms. Expert Systems Applic 2010; 37(11): 7394–7407.

25.

Lee

. Using fuzzy AHP to develop intellectual capital evaluation model for assessing their performance contribution in a university. Expert Systems Applic 2010; 37(7): 4941–4947.

26.

Nepal

Yadav

Murat

. A fuzzy-AHP approach to prioritization of CS attributes in target planning for automotive product development. Expert Systems Applic 2010; 37(10): 6775–6786.

27.

Yang

Sen

. A general multilevel evaluation process for hybrid MADM with uncertainty. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics 1994; 24(10): 1458–1473.

28.

Yang

Singh

. An evidential reasoning approach for multiple-attribute decision making with uncertainty. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics 1994; 24(1): 1–18.

29.

Yang

. Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties. Eur J Opl Res 2001; 131(1): 31–61.

30.

Yang

. On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics Part A: Systems Hum 2002; 32(3): 289–304.

31.

Liu

Yang

Wang

Sii

. Engineering system safety analysis and synthesis using the fuzzy rule-based evidential reasoning approach. Qual Reliability Engng Int 2005; 21(4): 387–411.

32.

Yang

Wang

. The evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainty. Eur J Opl Res 2006; 174(3): 1914–1943.

33.

Yang

Liu

Wang

. Belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning approach – RIMER. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics Part A: Systems Hum 2006; 36(2): 266–285.

34.

Yang

Wang

Chin

. The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties. Eur J Opl Res 2006; 171(1): 309–343.

35.

Yang

Liu

. Optimization models for training belief-rule-based systems. IEEE Trans Systems, Man, Cybernetics Part A: Systems Hum 2007; 37(4): 569–585.

36.

Guo

Yang

Chin

Wang

. Evidential reasoning based preference programming for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. Eur J Opl Res 2007; 182(3): 1294–1312.

37.

Yang

Bonsall

Wang

. Fuzzy rule-based Bayesian reasoning approach for prioritization of failures in FMEA. IEEE Trans Reliability 2008; 57(3): 517–528.

38.

Guo

Yang

Chin

. Evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under both fuzzy and interval uncertainty. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Systems 2009; 17(3); 683–697.

39.

Chin

Wang

Yang

Poon

KKG

. An evidential reasoning based approach for quality function deployment under uncertainty. Expert Systems Applic 2009; 36(3): 5684–5694.

40.

Chin

Yang

Guo

Lam

JPK

. An evidential-reasoning-interval-based method for new product design assessment. IEEE Trans Engng Managmt 2009; 56(1): 142–156.

41.

Zhou

Liu

Yang

. Evidential reasoning-based nonlinear programming model for MCDA under fuzzy weights and utilities. Int J Intell Systems 2010; 25(1): 31–58.

Reference ship selection for the on-time performance benchmarking of ships

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References