Node penalty evaluation of a complex situation is an important yet difficult human decision making within the conceptual framework of fuzzy logic and approximating reasoning. The multi-criteria safety route problem is concerned with determining the safety route from an origin to a destination through a connected network, given the different criterion associated with each node of the network. In most cases routes are determined based on shortest distances least-cost or least-time. In our case in addition to the previous criterion other criteria such as elevation restricted areas type I and restricted areas type II are not considered as intelligent as they must be. To tackle the problem a new integration form took place between operations research and artificial intelligence. The statement of multiple criterion safety route problem with fuzzy coefficients will be presented. A simpler yet more effective methods are introduced to develop a fuzzy logic safety route model based on these different criteria of route parameters that converts fiizzified inputs to fuzzy output through fuzzy membership functions.
FAHMY, A. (1999). Node Penalty Evaluation in Multi Criteria Safety Route Problem: A F Logic Approach. The Egyptian International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 3(EIJEST, Vol. 3, 1999), 4-5. doi: 10.21608/eijest.1999.96499
MLA
A FAHMY. "Node Penalty Evaluation in Multi Criteria Safety Route Problem: A F Logic Approach". The Egyptian International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 3, EIJEST, Vol. 3, 1999, 1999, 4-5. doi: 10.21608/eijest.1999.96499
HARVARD
FAHMY, A. (1999). 'Node Penalty Evaluation in Multi Criteria Safety Route Problem: A F Logic Approach', The Egyptian International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 3(EIJEST, Vol. 3, 1999), pp. 4-5. doi: 10.21608/eijest.1999.96499
VANCOUVER
FAHMY, A. Node Penalty Evaluation in Multi Criteria Safety Route Problem: A F Logic Approach. The Egyptian International Journal of Engineering Sciences and Technology, 1999; 3(EIJEST, Vol. 3, 1999): 4-5. doi: 10.21608/eijest.1999.96499