A hybrid approach based on the BWM-VIKOR and GRA for ranking facility location in construction site layout for Mehr project in Tehran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a new hybrid framework based on the multi-criteria decision making in order to rank the potential site layout locations by consideration of the cost and safety criteria in the Mehr Construction Project in Tehran, Iran. To this end, all of the criteria in selecting suitable potential locations are extracted from the research literature and the most effective ones, which are matched with existing conditions in Tehran are considered based on the opinion of experts,. Then, the proper locations for site layout are determined as the potential alternatives and ranked by experts based on the structure. According to the data collected from the questionnaires, the weights of the selected criteria are calculated using Best Worst Method (BWM) and the final ranking of the locations is performed using two Gray Relational Analysis and VIKOR methods. The computational results indicate that both VIKOR and GRA methods yield the same ranking. However, a method with higher reliability should be used to select the best potential location of construction site layout. Therefore, the sensitivity analysis of final outputs on the parameters existing in VIKOR and GRA methods is used in order to rank the alternatives and select the best approach. According to the computational results, the GRA method provides higher robustness compared with the VIKOR method. Accordingly, the ranking obtained from the GRA method is employed as the final solution in implementing the case study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".