4.5 Article

Multi-strategy budget allocation decision support system for seismic rehabilitation of road infrastructure

Journal

STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING
Volume 10, Issue 2, Pages 239-260

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2012.737810

Keywords

infrastructure management; decision-making; multi-objective optimisation; rehabilitation; Knapsack problem; genetic algorithms

Funding

  1. Research Management Centre, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia [01J37]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Economic efficiency is an important factor in seismic rehabilitation of road infrastructures. An inventory of structures is screened to identify seismically deficient parts and prioritise them in the order of need for rehabilitation purposes. In most cases, the financial resources for road infrastructure rehabilitation projects are limited. Therefore, there is a need to efficiently allocate resources to various projects. This article presents a multi-strategy decision support system (DSS) for seismic rehabilitation budget allocation across existing road infrastructures. This DSS employs a multi-criteria assessment module that takes into account different criteria to estimate the financial needs for rehabilitation and to establish an allocation methodology based on the available budget in a fiscal year. To select the optimal package of projects, a genetic algorithm (GA) optimisation module is developed. Multi-objective decision-making is conducted under a specific decision strategy (DS) by solving a (0-1) Knapsack problem. To demonstrate the applicability of the GA-based approach, a hypothetical decision-making problem is presented. The results reveal that the optimal package is more sensitive to the available budget and DS than to the weights of criteria and project scores. Using this system, managers can compare their decisions for different strategies and significantly improve management efficiency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available