Open Access
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 234, 2018
BulTrans-2018 – 10th International Scientific Conference on Aeronautics, Automotive and Railway Engineering and Technologies
Article Number 06002
Number of page(s) 9
Section Transport Management and Logistics
Published online 21 November 2018
  1. D. Islam, T. Zunder, R. Jorna, Performance evaluation of an online benchmarking tool for European freight transport chains, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 20 (2), 233-250 (2013) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. B. Abramovic., I. Lovric, V. Supalo, Analysis of intermodal terminals service quality in the republic of Croatia, Promet - Traffic&Transportatiion, 24 (3), 253–260 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. T. Skrucany, J. Ponicky, M. Kendra, J. Gnap, Comparison of railway and road passenger transport in energy consumption and GHG production, 12th International Scientific Conference Of Young Scientists On Sustainable, Modern and Safe Transport, TRANSCOM 2017, Procedia Engineering, 192, 806-811 (2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. S. Martinov, Evaluation model of railway infrastructure potential for establishment of freight intermodal terminals, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Road and Rail Infrastructures - CETRA 2018, 911-916 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  5. V. Pencheva, A. Asenov, D. Topchu, I. Beloev, B. Evstatiev, Organisation of the work on collecting routes in postal activity through an automated system for collection of information, Transport problems, 12 (3), 147-157 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  6. A. Kengpol, W. Meethom, M. Tuominen. The development of a decision support system in multimodal transportation routing within Greater Mekong sub-region countries, International Journal of Production Economics 140 (2), 691-701 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. W. Sattayaprasert, S. Hanaoka, P. Taneerananon, R. Pradhananga, Creating a risk-based network for hazmat logistics by route prioritization with AHP: Case Study: Gasoline Logistics in Rayong, IATSS Research, 32 (1), 74-87 (2008) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. V. Podvezko, H. Sivilevicius, The use of AHP and rank correlation methods for determining the significance of the interaction between the elements of a transport system having a strong influence on traffic safety, Transport, 28 (4), 389 (2013) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. H. Sivilevicius, Modelling the interaction of transport system elements, Transport, 26 (1), 20 (2011) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. S. Stoilova, L. Kunchev, Study of criteria for evaluation of transportation with intermodal transport, Proceedings of 16th International Scientific Conference Engineering for Rural Development, Jelgava, Latvia, 349-357 (May 24-26, 2017) [Google Scholar]
  11. C. Chen, Developing Taiwan into the tourist transport center of East Asia, Tourism Economics, 18 (6), 1401-1411 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. S. Gandhia, S. Mangla, P. Kumar, D. Kumar, Evaluating factors in implementation of successful green supply chain, International strategic management review, 3, 96–109 (2015) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. S. Stoilova, L. Kunchev, Methodology for optimal transportation using a three-phase model, C. R. Acad. Bulg. Sci., 69 (7), 903-908 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  14. S. Stoilova, Evaluation efficiency of intermodal transport Using multi-criteria analysis, Engineering for rural development, Jelgava, 2030-2039 (May 23-25, 2018) [Google Scholar]
  15. R. Li, Y. Leung, Multi-objective route planning for dangerous goods using compromise programming. J. Geogr. Syst., 13, 249–271 (2011) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. Q. Ma, H. Song, W. Zhu. Low-carbon airline fleet assignment: A compromise approach, Journal of Air Transport Management, 68, 86–102 (2018) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. J. Shiau, F. Wu, Compromise programming methodology for determining instream flow under multiobjective water allocation criteria, Journal of the American water resources association JAWRA, Paper No. 05013, April 2007, 1179-1191 (2007) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. F. Andre, M. Cardenete, C. Romero, Using compromise programming for macroeconomic policymaking in a general equilibrium framework: theory and application to the Spanish economy, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59, 875–883 (2008) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. B. Poff, D. Tecle, G. Neary, B. Geils, Compromiise programming in forest management, Journal of the Arizona-Nevada academy of science, 42 (1), 44-60 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. R. Srinivasa, D. Kumar, Multicriterion analisis in engineering and management, 266 (PHL Learning Private Limited, Delhi, 2014) [Google Scholar]
  21. A. Haddadha, A. Namazian, S. Yakhchali, Project selection problem by combination of Shannon Entropy and MCDM techniques, International Conference on Literature, History, Humanities and Social Sciences (LHHSS-17), Dubai, 32-35 (Jan. 1-2, 2017) [Google Scholar]
  22. R. Mavi, M. Goh, N. Mavi, Supplier selection with Shannon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS in the context of supply chain risk management, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 216–225 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. T. Saaty, Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (RWS Publications, 2000) [Google Scholar]
  24. D. Vujanovic, V. Momcilovic, N. Bojovic, V. Papic, Evaluation of vehicle fleet maintenance management indicators by application of DEMATEL and ANP, Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 10552–10563 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. S. Khanam, J. Siddiqui, F. Talib. A DEMATEL approach for prioritizing the TQM enablers and IT resources in the Indian ICT industry, International Journal of Applied Management Sciences and Engineering, 3 (1), 11-26 (2016) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. P. Lewandowski, User charges for road infrastructure in certain European Union member states, Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin, 48 (120), 138-145 (2016) [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.