Advanced TOPSIS Approach to Variable Index Weighting in Bridge Condition Assessment
Publication: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
Volume 38, Issue 5
Abstract
As the service age of bridges increases, the degeneration of the bridge components leads to changes in the importance of corresponding state assessment indices. Employing fixed weights in bridge service condition assessments may result in inconsistent outcomes with the actual conditions. Therefore, this paper proposes an index weight updating method that aims to achieve index weight updating based on the operational status of bridges, thereby enhancing the accuracy of bridge service condition assessment results. This method utilizes the bidirectional projection of fuzzy numbers representing index state intervals and ideal targets as the technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS) evaluation criteria for index importance. This paper conducts case analyses of a suspension bridge across multiple service periods which comprise three primary conditions: periods of intact bridge status, suboptimal conditions resembling expected degradation, and damaged status due to external effects. The case study results demonstrate that the updated weight using the proposed method effectively reflects the influence of actual changes in bridge status on the importance of indices. In the cases of good condition or matching the expected degradative state, the updated weights obtained could better reflect the actual service condition of the bridge compared to fixed weights provided by standards. When considering the effect of accidents or other incidental factors, the updated weights obtained through the proposed method could reflect the influence of actual component conditions on the importance of indices while the initial weights and age-dependent updated weights cannot. Thereby, the assessment results derived from this approach are more consistent with expected states and maintenance levels, validating its effectiveness and comparative advantages over alternative methodologies. The results indicate that the proposed method can significantly enhance the rationality of assessment index weights, serving as a more effective and rational approach for evaluating bridge service conditions.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
No data, models, or code were generated or used during the study.
Acknowledgments
Financial support was supplied by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Grant No. 226-2024-00036 and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 52122801, 11925206, 51978609, U22A20254, and U23A20659).
References
AASHTO. 2018. Manual for bridge evaluation. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Al Shaini, I., and A. C. T. Blanco. 2023. “Bridge deck surface damage assessment using point cloud data.” Adv. Bridge Eng. 4 (1): 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43251-023-00110-4.
Atanassov, K., and G. Gargov. 1989. “Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets.” Fuzzy Sets Syst. 31 (3): 343–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(89)90205-4.
Biswas, P., S. Pramanik, and B. C. Giri. 2016. “TOPSIS method for multi-attribute group decision-making under single-valued neutrosophic environment.” Neural Comput. Appl. 27 (3): 727–737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1891-2.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2006. Steel, concrete and composite bridges. London: BSI. https://doi.org/10.3403/BS5400.
Caprani, C. C., and J. De Maria. 2020. “Long-span bridges: Analysis of trends using a global database.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 16 (1): 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2019.1639773.
Chen, T. 2021. “Pythagorean fuzzy linear programming technique for multidimensional analysis of preference using a squared-distance-based approach for multiple criteria decision analysis.” Expert Syst. Appl. 164 (164): 113908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113908.
Chen, T., and C. Tsao. 2008. “The interval-valued fuzzy TOPSIS method and experimental analysis.” Fuzzy Sets Syst. 159 (11): 1410–1428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2007.11.004.
Das Khan, S., A. K. Datta, P. Topdar, and S. R. Sagi. 2022. “A cause-based defect ranking approach for existing concrete bridges using analytic hierarchy process and fuzzy-topsis.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 19 (11): 1555–1567. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2022.2035407.
Djenadic, S., M. Tanasijevic, P. Jovancic, D. Ignjatovic, D. Petrovic, and U. Bugaric. 2022. “Risk evaluation: Brief review and innovation model based on fuzzy logic and MCDM.” Mathematics 10 (5): 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10050811.
Inkoom, S., and J. Sobanjo. 2018. “Availability function as bridge element’s importance weight in computing overall bridge health index.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 14 (12): 1598–1610. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2018.1476561.
Ivezic, D., M. Tanasijevic, and D. Ignjatovic. 2008. “Fuzzy approach to dependability performance evaluation.” Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int. 24 (7): 779–792. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.926.
Jin, H. S., X. E. Jin, J. T. Jin, and X. Y. Jin. 2021. “Performance assessment framework for reinforced concrete pipes in rainwater drainage system using a combined weights-fuzzy theory.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 35 (2): 04021001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001563.
Lan, Z., and M. Huang. 2018. “Safety assessment for seawall based on constrained maximum entropy projection pursuit model.” Nat. Hazards 91 (3): 1165–1178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-018-3172-8.
Li, D. 2010. “TOPSIS-based nonlinear-programming methodology for multiattribute decision making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets.” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 18 (2): 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2010.2041009.
Liao, H., X. Wu, X. Mi, and F. Herrera. 2020. “An integrated method for cognitive complex multiple experts multiple criteria decision making based on ELECTRE III with weighted Borda rule.” Omega 93 (Apr): 102052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2019.03.010.
Liao, H., Z. Xu, and X. Zeng. 2014. “Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and their application in multi-criteria decision making.” Inf. Sci. 271 (Jun): 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2014.02.125.
Liu, H., X. Wang, G. Tan, and X. He. 2020. “System reliability evaluation of a bridge structure based on multivariate copulas and the AHP–ew method that considers multiple failure criteria.” Appl. Sci. 10 (4): 1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10041399.
Liu, S., W. Yu, F. T. S. Chan, and B. Niu. 2021. “A variable weight-based hybrid approach for multi-attribute group decision making under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets.” Int. J. Intell. Syst. 36 (2): 1015–1052. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22329.
Liu, W. 1997. “Balanced function and its application for variable weight synthesizing.” Syst. Eng. Theory Pract. 4 (Jan): 59–65.
Liu, Y., B. Wang, and X. Liu. 2023. “Comprehensive assessment of cable-stayed bridge based on Pagerank algorithm.” Adv. Bridge Eng. 4 (1): 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43251-023-00111-3.
Lyu, H.-M., W.-J. Sun, S.-L. Shen, and A.-N. Zhou. 2020. “Risk assessment using a new consulting process in fuzzy AHP.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 146 (3): 04019112. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001757.
MoHURD (Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development). 2017. Technical standard of maintenance for city bridge. Beijing: MoHURD.
MOT (Ministry of Transport). 2011. Standards of technical condition evaluation of highway bridges. Beijing: MOT.
MOT (Ministry of Transport). 2021. Specifications for maintenance of highway bridges and culverts. JTG 5120-2021. Beijing: MOT.
Navarro, I. J., V. Penadés-Plà, D. Martínez-Muñoz, R. Rempling, and V. Yepes. 2020. “Life cycle sustainability assessment for multi-criteria decision making in bridge design: A review.” J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 26 (7): 690–704. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2020.13599.
Özcan, E. C., S. Ünlüsoy, and T. Eren. 2017. “A combined goal programming—AHP approach supported with TOPSIS for maintenance strategy selection in hydroelectric power plants.” Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 78 (Jan): 1410–1423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.039.
Park, D. G., Y. C. Kwun, J. H. Park, and I. Y. Park. 2009. “Correlation coefficient of interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets and its application to multiple attribute group decision making problems.” Math. Comput. Modell. 50 (9–10): 1279–1293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2009.06.010.
Pena, J., G. Nápoles, and Y. Salgueiro. 2020. “Explicit methods for attribute weighting in multi-attribute decision-making: A review study.” Artif. Intell. Rev. 53 (5): 3127–3152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-019-09757-w.
Ren, Y., X. Xu, B. Liu, and Q. Huang. 2021. “An age- and condition-dependent variable weight model for performance evaluation of bridge systems.” KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 25 (5): 1816–1825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-021-1243-y.
Roszkowska, E., and T. Wachowicz. 2015. “Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 242 (3): 920–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.10.050.
Tan, Y., Z. Zhang, H. Wang, and S. Zhou. 2021. “Gray relation analysis for optimal selection of bridge reinforcement scheme based on fuzzy-AHP weights.” Math. Probl. Eng. 2021 (Apr): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8813940.
Wan, S., and J. Dong. 2014. “A possibility degree method for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy multi-attribute group decision making.” J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 80 (1): 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2013.07.007.
Xiao, Q., H. Huang, and C. Tang. 2023. “Quantitative analysis of the importance and correlation of urban bridges and roads in the study of road network vulnerability.” Adv. Bridge Eng. 4 (1): 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43251-023-00096-z.
Xu, X., Q. Huang, Y. Ren, D. Zhao, D. Zhang, and H. Sun. 2019. “Condition evaluation of suspension bridges for maintenance, repair and rehabilitation: A comprehensive framework.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 15 (4): 555–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2018.1562479.
Xu, Z., and H. Hu. 2010. “Projection models for intuitionistic fuzzy multiple attribute decision making.” Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Making 9 (2): 267–280. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622010003816.
Yu, Y., W. Zeng, W. Liu, H. Zhang, and X. Wang. 2019. “Crack propagation and fracture process zone (FPZ) of wood in the longitudinal direction determined using digital image correlation (DIC) technique.” Remote Sens. 11 (13): 1562. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11131562.
Yue, Z. 2011. “Deriving decision maker’s weights based on distance measure for interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy group decision making.” Expert Syst. Appl. 38 (9): 11665–11670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.03.046.
Zhang, H., M. Shen, Y. Zhang, Y. Chen, and C. Lu. 2018. “Identification of static loading conditions using piezoelectric sensor arrays.” J. Appl. Mech. 85 (1): 011008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4038426.
Zhang, H., X. Xie, J. Jiang, and M. Yamashita. 2015. “Assessment on transient sound radiation of a vibrating steel bridge due to traffic loading.” J. Sound Vib. 336 (Jan): 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.10.006.
Zhuang, Y., W. Chen, T. Jin, B. Chen, H. Zhang, and W. Zhang. 2022. “A review of computer vision-based structural deformation monitoring in field environments.” Sensors 22 (10): 3789. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22103789.
Žnidarič, A., V. Pakrashi, E. O’Brien, and A. O’Connor. 2011. “A review of road structure data in six European countries.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng.: Urban Des. Plann. 164 (4): 225–232. https://doi.org/10.1680/udap.900054.
Zong, J., K. Zhang, B. Zhan, and R. Ma. 2021. “Fuzzy assessment of steel deck pavement for long suspension bridge of the Fourth Nanjing Yangtze River Bridge.” Adv. Civ. Eng. 2021 (May): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8857407.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 23, 2023
Accepted: May 23, 2024
Published online: Aug 14, 2024
Published in print: Oct 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Jan 14, 2025
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Architectural engineering
- Bridge components
- Bridge engineering
- Bridge management
- Bridge tests
- Bridges
- Bridges (by type)
- Building management
- Business management
- Case studies
- Decision making
- Engineering fundamentals
- Field tests
- Maintenance and operation
- Methodology (by type)
- Practice and Profession
- Research methods (by type)
- Structural engineering
- Suspension bridges
- Tests (by type)
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.