SYNTESIS OF GROUP DECISIONS IN THE PROBLEM OF ANALYSIS OF THE TECHNICAL CONDITION OF MILITARY-CIVILIAN OBJECTS
Keywords:Еvidence theory, technical condition category, ranking, expert judgments, uncertainty.
AbstractContext. Quite often, experts are involved in the process of diagnosis and monitoring the technical condition of buildings and
structures, and in this case, situations might arise when expert data is generated under some specific types of uncertainty, and their
possible combinations. This, in turn, necessitates the development of new approaches aimed at solving the problems of structuring
and analytical processing of inaccurate, uncertain, fuzzy expert knowledge.
Objective. The methodology for choosing the category of technical condition of construction objects, including buildings and
structures, and ranking the corresponding construction objects within the given category of the technical condition according to their
degree of danger (expected damage in the event of an emergency) has been proposed in this paper. The proposed approach is based on the expert assessment methods and the mathematical apparatus of the evidence theory, which allows operating correctly with data generated under uncertainty, incompleteness, and inaccuracy. In order to improve the quality of combination results, it is proposed to use one of the proportional conflict redistribution rules and determine the optimal evidence combination order based on metrics in evidence theory.
Results. The paper proposes a methodology for the synthesis of group solutions for assessing the technical condition of civil,
industrial and military-technical construction objects, and determining objects that primarily need maintenance or overhaul under
complex forms of uncertainty and multi-alternatives. Application of the proposed methodology will allow rational distribution of
available resources when planning preventive measures and carrying out repair work (overhaul, reconstruction, etc.) to increase the
efficiency of their trouble-free operation.
Conclusions. The methodology proposed in this study constitutes the theoretical basis for the design of decision support systems
for monitoring the technical condition of residential and/or non-residential real estate (buildings, structures) for various purposes.
Kwan A., Ng P. L. Building diagnostic techniques and building diagnosis: the way forward, Engineering Asset
Management – Systems, Professional Practices and Certification, 2015, Vol. 19, pp. 849–862.
Vilhena A., Pedro J. B., Brito J. Comparison of methods used in European countries to assess buildings’ condition,
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Durability of Building Materials and Components, 2011,
Porto, pp. 1–7. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3460.7124
Mitra G., Jain K. K., Bhattacharjee B. Condition assessment of corrosion distressed reinforced concrete buildings using
fuzzy logic, Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 2010, Vol. 24, No. 6, pp. 652–569.
Holicky M., Navarova V., Gottfried R., Kronika M., Markova J., Sykora M., Jung K. Basics for assessment of
existing structures. Prague, Klokner Institute, Czech Technical University, 2013, 109 p.
Wahida R., Milton G., Hamadan N. et al. Building condition assessment imperative and process, Procedia – Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 2012, Vol. 65, pp. 775–780. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.198
Hamdia K. M., Arafa M., Alqedra M. Structural damage assessment criteria for reinforced concrete buildings by
using a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, Underground Space, 2018, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 243–249.
Gao Z., Li J. Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process evaluation method in assessing corrosion damage of reinforced
concrete bridges, Civil Engineering Journal, 2018, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 843–856. DOI: 10.28991/cej-0309138
Rashidi M., Gibson P. A methodology for bridge condition evaluation, Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture,
, Vol. 6, No. 9, pp. 1149–1157. DOI: 10.17265/1934-7359/2012.09.007
Ter Berg C. J. A., Leontaris G., Van den Boomen M. et al. Expert judgments based maintenance decision support
method for structures with a long service-life, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2019, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 492–
Grigorovskiy P., Terentyev O., Mikautadze R. Development of the technique of expert assessment in the diagnosis of the
technical condition of buildings, Technology Audit and Production Reserves, 2017, No. 2, pp. 10–15.
Abbott G. R., Mc Duling J. J., Parsons S. at el. Building condition assessment: a performance evaluation tool towards
sustainable asset management, Proceedings of the 2007 CIB World building Congress: Construction for Development,
Cape Town, 2007, pp. 649–662.
Jo H. W., Jung I. S., Lee C. S. Fuzzy based condition assessment model prototype of middle and small-size
buildings, Proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC),
Seoul, 2011, pp. 1330–1331. DOI: 10.22260/ISARC2011/0246
Terentyev O., Malyna B. Expert information system for decision support for the problem of diagnostics of technical
condition of buildings, International Journal of Science and Research, 2015, Vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 652–654.
Chen Z., Clements-Croome D., Bakker H. H. C. at el. A remote expert system for building diagnosis, Proceedings of
the 8th International Conference and Exhibition on Healthy Buildings: Creating a Healthy Indoor Environment for
People, Lisboa, 2006, pp. 99–104.
Dempster A. P. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multi–valued mapping, Annals of Mathematical Statistics,
, Vol. 38, pp. 325–339.
Shafer G. A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1976, 297 p.
Beynon M. J., Curry B., Morgan P. The Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence: an alternative approach to multicriteria
decision modeling, Omega, 2000, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 37–50.
Jousselme A. L., Grenier D., Boss´e E. A new distance between two bodies of evidence, Information Fusion, 2001,
Vol. 2, pp. 91–101.
Smarandache F. Advances and applications of DSmT for information fusion. Vol. 1. Rehoboth, American Research
Press, 2004, 760 p.
Saaty Т. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: panning, priority setting, resource allocation. Front cover. New York,
McGraw Hill, 1980, 287 p.
Velychko O. M., Gordiyenko T. B., Kolomiets L. V. Methodologies of expert’s competence evaluation and group
expert evaluation, Metallurgical and Mining Industry, 2015, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 262–271.
Velychko O. M., Gordiyenko T. B., Kolomiets L. V. Comparative analysis of the assessment results of the
competence of technical experts by different methods, Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies,
, Vol. 4, No. 3 (88), pp. 4–10. DOI: 10.15587/1729-4061.2017.106825
Borissova D. A group decision making model considering experts competency: An application in personnel selection,
Comptes Rendus de l’Academie Bulgare des Sciences:Sciences Mathematiques et Naturelles, 2018, Vol. 71,
No. 11, pp. 1520–1527. DOI: 10.7546/CRABS.2018.11.11
Becker J., Becker A., Salabun W. Construction and use of the ANP decision model taking into account the experts’
competence, Procedia Computer Science, 2017, Vol. 112, pp. 2269–2279. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.08.145
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 A. V. Shved
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Licensing Notifications in the Copyright Notices
The journal allows the authors to hold the copyright without restrictions and to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles.
The journal allows to reuse and remixing of its content, in accordance with a Creative Commons license СС BY -SA.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY-SA that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.