Performance Improvement of Freight Logistics Hub Selection in Thailand by Coordinated Simulation and AHP

  • Wanitwattanakosol, Jirapat ;
  • Holimchayachotikul, Pongsak ;
  • Nimsrikul, Phatchari ;
  • Sopadang, Apichat
  • Received : 2010.02.19
  • Accepted : 2010.05.17
  • Published : 2010.06.01


This paper presents a two-phase quantitative framework to aid the decision making process for effective selection of an efficient freight logistics hub from 8 alternatives in Thailand on the North-South economic corridor. Phase 1 employs both multiple regression and Pearson Feature selection to find the important criteria, as defined by logistics hub score, and to reduce number of criteria by eliminating the less important criteria. The result of Pearson Feature selection indicated that only 5 of 15 criteria affected the logistics hub score. Moreover, Genetic Algorithm (GA) was constructed from original 15 criteria data set to find the relationship between logistics criteria and freight logistics hub score. As a result, the statistical tools are provided the same 5 important criteria, affecting logistics hub score from GA, and data mining tool. Phase 2 performs the fuzzy stochastic AHP analysis with the five important criteria. This approach could help to gain insight into how the imprecision in judgment ratios may affect their alternatives toward the best solution and how the best alternative may be identified with certain confidence. The main objective of the paper is to find the best alternative for selecting freight logistics hub under proper criteria. The experimental results show that by using this approach, Chiang Mai province is the best place with the confidence interval 95%.


Pearson Feature Selection;Multiple Regression;Genetic Algorithm;Fuzzy AHP;Simulation;Freight Logistics Hub


  1. Cheng, C. H. and Mon, D. L. (1994), Evaluating weapon system by AHP based on fuzzy scale, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 63, 1-10.
  2. Cooper, M., Ellram, L., Gardner, J., and Hanks, A. (1997), Meshing multiple alliances, Journal of Business Logistics, 18, 67-89.
  3. Eskandari, H. and Rabelo, L. (2007), Handling uncertainty in the analytical hierarchy process: A stochastic approach, International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making, 6, 177-189.
  4. Fayyad, U., Piatetsky-Shapiro, G., and Smyth, P. (1996), The KDD process for extracting useful knowledge from volumes of data, Communication of ACM, 39(11), 27-34.
  5. Fu, Y. (1997) Data mining, IEEE Potentials, 164, 18-20.
  6. Gabus, A. and Fontela, E. (1972), McA'Nulty, J., and Kjenstad, D. (1996) World problems an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL, Battelle Geneva Research Centre, Switzerland Geneva.
  7. Han, J. and Kamber, M. (2001), Data mining: concepts and techniques, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
  8. Harding, J. A., Shahbaz, M. Srinivas, and Kusiak, A. (2006), Data Mining in Manufacturing: A review, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 128, 969-976.
  9. Irani, K. B., Cheng, J., Fayyad, U. M., and Qian, Z. (1993), Applying Machine Learning to Semiconductor Manufacturing, IEEE Expert, 8(1), 41-47.
  10. Jayaraman, V. (1998), Transportation, facility location and inventory issues in distribution network design: An investigation, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 18(5), 471-494.
  11. Lee, M. H. (1993), Knowledge based factory, Artif. Intell. Eng., 8, 109-125.
  12. Lee, W. B., Lau, H., Liu, Z., and Tam, S. (2001), A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach in modular product design, Expert System, 18(1), 32-42.
  13. Mentzer, J. T., De Witt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., and Zacharia, Z. G. (2001), Defining Supply Chain Management, Journal of Business Logistics, 22, 1-25.
  14. Piatetsky-Shapiro, G. (1999), The data mining industry coming of age, IEEE Intell. Syst., 14(6), 32-34.
  15. Nimsrikul, P. and Sopadang, A. (2008), Application of Multiple Criteria Decision Making for selecting the freight logistics hub in Thailand. Proceedings of the GTT Conference, Phetchaburi, Thailand, 930- 941.
  16. New, S. J. and Payne, P. (1995), Research frameworks in logistics: three models, seven dinners and a survey, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 25(10), 60-77.
  17. Opricovic, S. (1998), Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Belgrade.
  18. Rabelo, L., Eskandari, H., Shaalan, T., and Helal, M. (2007), Value chain analysis using hybrid simulation and AHP, International Journal of Production Economics, 105, 536-547.
  19. Saaty, T. L. (1996), The analytic network process-decision making with dependence and feedback, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh.
  20. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw Hill, New York.
  21. Tan, K. C. (2001), A framework of supply chain management literature, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 7, 39-48.
  22. Vaidya, O. S. and Kumar, S. (2006), Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 169, 1-29.
  23. Wanitwattanakosol, J., Nimsrikul, P., and Sopadang, A. (2009), Selection the freight logistics hub in Thailand on the North-South economic corridors using MCDM: A fuzzy and stochastic approach, Proceedings of the IE Network Conference, Khon Kaen, Thailand, 1366-1371.
  24. Zadeh, L. A. (1965), Fuzzy sets, Information and Control, 8, 338-353.

Cited by

  1. Evaluating the knowledge of experts in the maritime regulatory field vol.44, pp.4, 2017,
  2. A Framework for Implementing Lean Manufacturing System in Small and Medium Enterprises vol.110-116, pp.1662-7482, 2011,