Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing of causes of accidents based on a novel integrated interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy methodology: towards a sustainable construction site

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The statistics pertaining to accidents occurring at construction sites underscore the pressing requirement for a substantial and timely reevaluation of safety measures within the construction sector. Accidents do not occur randomly; rather, they arise from the presence of unsafe actions, hazardous conditions, or a combination of both. The majority of accidents stem from a combination of contributing causes, including unsafe acts and conditions. To enhance safety performance on a broader scale, this study undertakes an extensive analysis to identify these causes, evaluate their importance, and determine the countries that are most and least impacted by them. Ten African countries were selected as potential alternatives based on the frequency of infrastructure construction projects. A thorough review of existing literature was conducted to establish a three-level criteria framework. The framework was further refined through the Modified Delphi method to gather expert opinions. The weights assigned to the criteria were determined using the interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy analytical hierarchy process methodology. The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution method under the same fuzzy environment was then employed to rank the alternative countries. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to assess the robustness of the proposed methodology. The analysis revealed that the main cause of accidents was attributed to poor management, as it included ineffective project supervision, inadequate safety policies, poor organizational structure, and inappropriate scheduling/planning as the main underlying sub-factors. Additionally, it was observed that the sixth alternative country exhibited the highest susceptibility to accidents occurring at construction sites.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Zhang F et al (2019) Construction site accident analysis using text mining and natural language processing techniques. Autom Constr 99:238–248

    Google Scholar 

  2. Al-Khaburi S, Amoudi O (2018) Analysis of accident causes at construction sites in Oman. Jordan J Civil Eng 12(2)

  3. De Silva N, Rathnayake U, Kulasekera K (2018) Under-reporting of construction accidents in Sri Lanka. J Eng Des Technol

  4. Williams OS, Hamid RA, Misnan MS (2018) Accident causal factors on the building construction sites: a review. Int J Built Environ Sustain 5(1)

  5. Williams OS, Hamid RA, Misnan MS (2019) Causes of building construction related accident in the south-western states of Nigeria. Int J Built Environ Sustain 6(1):14–22

    Google Scholar 

  6. Stević Ž et al. (2022) Assessment of causes of delays in the road construction projects in the Benin republic using fuzzy PIPRECIA method. Math Probl Eng

  7. Okorie V, Musonda I (2020) An investigation on supervisor’s ability and competency to conduct construction site health and safety induction training in Nigeria. Int J Constr Manag 20(5):357–366

    Google Scholar 

  8. Boadu EF, Wang CC, Sunindijo RY (2020) Characteristics of the construction industry in developing countries and its implications for health and safety: an exploratory study in Ghana. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17(11):4110

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rafindadi ADU, Napiah M, Othman I, Mikić M, Haruna A, Alarifi H, Al-Ashmori YY (2022) Analysis of the causes and preventive measures of fatal fall-related accidents in the construction industry. Ain Shams Eng J 13(4):101712

    Google Scholar 

  10. Oni O et al (2019) Relevance of construction site operative training in reducing accidents on construction sites in Nigeria. Int J Civil Eng Technol 10(5):979–990

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eguh T, Adenaiya O (2020) Monitoring and analysis of site accidents on construction site in Nigeria. FIG Working Week 2020, Smart surveyors for land and water management pp 1–13

  12. Falana J, Ghazaly NM (2019) Examination of causes and effects of accident on construction sites:(case study of lagos, lagos state, Nigeria). Int J Adv Sci Technol 28(16):1687–1694

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shittu AA et al. (2022) Impact of hazard recognition measures on the rate of accidents on construction sites in Abuja, Nigeria. J Build Perform 13(1).

  14. Ijaola IA et al (2021) Key indicators and dimensional causes of accident on construction sites. Int J Built Environ Sustain 8(1):81–89

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eze CJ, Ayuba P, Shittu AA (2018) Assessment of accident hazard in Nigerian building industy

  16. Okorie VN, Adindu CC (2020) An exposition of the socio-economic impacts of construction site accidents in Nigeria. J Surv Constr Property 11(1):38–47

    Google Scholar 

  17. Badi I, Bouraima MB, Muhammad LJ (2022) Risk assessment in construction projects using the grey theory. J Eng Manag Syst Eng 1(2):58–66

    Google Scholar 

  18. Badi I, Bouraima MB, Muhammad LJ (2022) The role of intelligent transportation systems in solving traffic problems and reducing environmental negative impact of urban transport. Decis Mak Anal 1(1):1–9

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kovač M et al. (2021) Novel spherical fuzzy MARCOS method for assessment of drone-based city logistics concepts. Complexity

  20. Kiptum CK et al (2022) Sustainable strategies for the successful operation of the bike-sharing system using an ordinal priority approach. J Eng Manag Syst Eng 1(2):43–50

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bouraima MB et al (2023) Integrated intelligent decision support model for ranking regional transport infrastructure programmes based on performance assessment. Expert Syst Appl p 119852

  22. Bouraima MB et al. (2023) An integrated fuzzy MCDM model for prioritizing strategies for successful implementation and operation of the bus rapid transit system. Ann Oper Res

  23. Bouraima MB et al (2023) Assessment of alternative railway systems for sustainable transportation using an integrated IRN SWARA and IRN CoCoSo model. Socioecon Plann Sci 86:101475

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bouraima MB et al. (2023) Prioritization of strategies for a sustainable regional transportation infrastructure by hybrid spherical fuzzy group decision-making approach. Neural Comput Appl

  25. Bouraima MB et al (2021) Assessing the performance of Sub-Saharan African (SSA) railways based on an integrated Entropy-MARCOS approach. Oper Res Eng Sci Theory Appl 4(2):13–35

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pamucar D, Deveci M, Gokasar I, Delen D, Köppen M, Pedrycz W (2023) Evaluation of metaverse integration alternatives of sharing economy in transportation using fuzzy Schweizer-Sklar based ordinal priority approach. Decis Supp Syst p 113944

  27. Pamučar D et al (2023) Selection of healthcare waste management treatment using fuzzy rough numbers and Aczel-Alsina Function. Eng Appl Artif Intell 121:106025

    Google Scholar 

  28. Simic V et al. (2023) Neutrosophic CEBOM-MACONT model for sustainable management of end-of-life tires. Applied Soft Computing

  29. Badi I, Kridish M (2020) Landfill site selection using a novel FUCOM-CODAS model: a case study in Libya. Sci African 9:e00537

    Google Scholar 

  30. Badi I et al (2021) Optimal site selection for sitting a solar park using a novel GIS-SWA’TEL model: a case study in Libya. Int J Green Energy 18(4):336–350

    Google Scholar 

  31. Bouraima MB et al (2022) Evaluation of factors affecting road maintenance in Kenyan counties using the ordinal priority approach. J Comput Cognitive Eng 00(00):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  32. Bouraima MB et al (2022) Prioritization road safety strategies towards zero road traffic injury using ordinal priority approach. Oper Res Eng Sci Theory Appl 5(2):206–221

    Google Scholar 

  33. Badi I, Stević Ž, Bouraima MB (2023) Overcoming obstacles to renewable energy development in Libya: an MCDM approach towards effective strategy formulation. Decis Mak Adv 1(1):17–24

    Google Scholar 

  34. Badi I, Stević Ž, Bouraima MB (2023) Evaluating free zone industrial plant proposals using a combined full consistency method-grey-cocoso model. J Ind Intell 1(2):101–109

    Google Scholar 

  35. Qiu YJ et al (2023) Strategies for enhancing industry 4.0 adoption in East Africa: an integrated spherical fuzzy swara-waspas approach. J Ind Intell 1(2):87–100

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ali A, Ullah K, Hussain A (2023) An approach to multi-attribute decision-making based on intuitionistic fuzzy soft information and Aczel-Alsina operational laws. J Decis Anal Intell Comput 3(1):80–89

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sahoo SK, Goswami SS (2023) A comprehensive review of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) Methods: advancements, applications, and future directions. Decis Mak Adv 1(1):25–48

    Google Scholar 

  38. Pamucar D, Biswas S (2023) A novel hybrid decision making framework for comparing market performance of metaverse crypto assets. Decis Mak Adv 1(1):49–62

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tešić D et al (2023) Development of the MCDM fuzzy LMAW-grey MARCOS model for selection of a dump truck. Rep Mech Eng 4(1):1–17

    Google Scholar 

  40. Chatterjee S, Chakraborty S (2023) A Multi-criteria decision making approach for 3D printer nozzle material selection. Rep Mech Eng 4(1):62–79

    Google Scholar 

  41. Senapati T, Yager RR (2020) Fermatean fuzzy sets. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 11(2):663–674

    Google Scholar 

  42. Senapati T, Yager RR (2019) Fermatean fuzzy weighted averaging/geometric operators and its application in multi-criteria decision-making methods. Eng Appl Artif Intell 85:112–121

    Google Scholar 

  43. Senapati T, Yager RR (2019) Some new operations over Fermatean fuzzy numbers and application of Fermatean fuzzy WPM in multiple criteria decision making. Informatica 30(2):391–412

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Jeevaraj S (2021) Ordering of interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy sets and its applications. Expert Syst Appl 185:115613

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mukhametzyanov I (2021) Specific character of objective methods for determining weights of criteria in MCDM problems: entropy, CRITIC and SD. Decis Mak Appl Manag Eng 4(2):76–105

    Google Scholar 

  46. Rezaei J (2015) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 53:49–57

    Google Scholar 

  47. Rezaei J (2016) Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega 64:126–130

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pamučar D, Stević Ž, Sremac S (2018) A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in mcdm models: full consistency method (fucom). Symmetry 10(9):393

    Google Scholar 

  49. Prentkovskis O et al (2018) A new methodology for improving service quality measurement: delphi-FUCOM-SERVQUAL model. Symmetry 10(12):757

    Google Scholar 

  50. Zagradjanin N, Pamucar D, Jovanovic K (2019) Cloud-based multi-robot path planning in complex and crowded environment with multi-criteria decision making using full consistency method. Symmetry 11(10):1241

    Google Scholar 

  51. Žižović M, Pamucar D (2019) New model for determining criteria weights: level based weight assessment (LBWA) model. Decis Mak Appl Manag Eng 2(2):126–137

    Google Scholar 

  52. Korucuk S et al (2023) Assessment of ideal smart network strategies for logistics companies using an integrated picture fuzzy LBWA–CoCoSo framework. Manag Decis 61(5):1434–1462

    Google Scholar 

  53. Biswas S et al (2021) An extended LBWA framework in picture fuzzy environment using actual score measures application in social enterprise systems. Int J Enterpr Inf Syst (IJEIS) 17(4):37–68

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ecer F et al (2021) Assessment of renewable energy resources using new interval rough number extension of the level based weight assessment and combinative distance-based assessment. Renew Energy 170:1156–1177

    Google Scholar 

  55. Torkayesh AE et al (2021) An integrated BWM-LBWA-CoCoSo framework for evaluation of healthcare sectors in Eastern Europe. Socioecon Plann Sci 78:101052

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ögel İY, Ecer F, Özgöz AA (2023) Identifying the leading retailer-based food waste causes in different perishable fast-moving consumer goods’ categories: application of the F-LBWA methodology. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(12):32656–32672

    Google Scholar 

  57. Biswas S et al (2022) A new spherical fuzzy LBWA-MULTIMOOSRAL framework: application in evaluation of leanness of MSMEs in India. Math Probl Eng 2022:1–17

    Google Scholar 

  58. Pamucar D et al (2021) Circular economy concepts in urban mobility alternatives using integrated DIBR method and fuzzy Dombi CoCoSo model. J Clean Prod 323:129096

    Google Scholar 

  59. Tešić D et al (2022) Modification of the DIBR and MABAC methods by applying rough numbers and its application in making decisions. Information 13(8):353

    Google Scholar 

  60. Božanić D, Pamucar D (2023) Overview of the method defining interrelationships between ranked criteria ii and its application in multi-criteria decision-making. In: Computational Intelligence for Engineering and Management Applications: Select Proceedings of CIEMA 2022 (pp 863-873). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore

  61. Asadabadi MR, Chang E, Saberi M (2019) Are MCDM methods useful? A critical review of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and analytic network process (ANP). Cogent Eng 6(1):1623153

    Google Scholar 

  62. Pamucar D et al (2022) Prioritization of sustainable mobility sharing systems using integrated fuzzy DIBR and fuzzy-rough EDAS model. Sustain Cities Soc 82:103910

    Google Scholar 

  63. Deveci M et al (2022) An analytics approach to decision alternative prioritization for zero-emission zone logistics. J Bus Res 146:554–570

    Google Scholar 

  64. Alosta A, Elmansuri O, Badi I (2021) Resolving a location selection problem by means of an integrated AHP-RAFSI approach. Rep Mech Eng 2(1):135–142

    Google Scholar 

  65. Biswas TK, Das MC (2020) Selection of the barriers of supply chain management in Indian manufacturing sectors due to COVID-19 impacts. Oper Res Eng Sci Theory Appl 3(3):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  66. Tešić D et al. (2023) DIBR–DOMBI–FUZZY MAIRCA model for strategy selection in the system of defense. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society

  67. Darko A et al (2019) Review of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction. Int J Constr Manag 19(5):436–452

    Google Scholar 

  68. Ayyildiz E, Erdogan M, Taskin Gumus A (2021) A Pythagorean fuzzy number-based integration of AHP and WASPAS methods for refugee camp location selection problem: a real case study for Istanbul. Turkey. Neural Comput Appl 33(22):15751–15768

    Google Scholar 

  69. Liu Y, Eckert CM, Earl C (2020) A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Syst Appl 161:113738

    Google Scholar 

  70. Yildiz A et al. (2022) An integrated interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS methodology to determine the safest route for cash in transit operations: a real case in Istanbul. Neural Comput Appl pp 1–16

  71. Moslem S, et al. (2023) A systematic review of analytic hierarchy process applications to solve transportation problems: from 2003 to 2019. IEEE Access

  72. Ayyildiz E, Taskin A (2022) A novel spherical fuzzy AHP-VIKOR methodology to determine serving petrol station selection during COVID-19 lockdown: a pilot study for İstanbul. Socio Econ Plan Sci 83:101345

    Google Scholar 

  73. Stević Ž et al (2020) Sustainable supplier selection in healthcare industries using a new MCDM method: measurement of alternatives and ranking according to COmpromise solution (MARCOS). Comput Ind Eng 140:106231

    Google Scholar 

  74. Pamučar D, Ćirović G (2015) The selection of transport and handling resources in logistics centers using multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC). Expert Syst Appl 42(6):3016–3028

    Google Scholar 

  75. Torkayesh AE et al (2023) A systematic literature review of MABAC method and applications: an outlook for sustainability and circularity. Informatica 34(2):415–448

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  76. Pamučar D, Vasin L, Lukovac L (2014) Selection of railway level crossings for investing in security equipment using hybrid DEMATEL-MARICA model. In: XVI international scientific-expert conference on railway, railcon (pp 89-92)

  77. Pamucar DS, Pejcic Tarle S, Parezanovic T (2018) New hybrid multi-criteria decision-making DEMATELMAIRCA model: sustainable selection of a location for the development of multimodal logistics centre. Econ Res Ekonomska Istraživanja 31(1):1641–1665

    Google Scholar 

  78. Gigović L et al (2016) The combination of expert judgment and GIS-MAIRCA analysis for the selection of sites for ammunition depots. Sustainability 8(4):372

    Google Scholar 

  79. Khan MJ et al (2022) Improved generalized dissimilarity measure-based VIKOR method for Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 37(3):1807–1845

    Google Scholar 

  80. Akram M, Dudek WA, Ilyas F (2019) Group decision-making based on pythagorean fuzzy TOPSIS method. Int J Intell Syst 34(7):1455–1475

    Google Scholar 

  81. de Farias Aires RF, Ferreira L (2019) A new approach to avoid rank reversal cases in the TOPSIS method. Comput Ind Eng 132:84–97

    Google Scholar 

  82. Deveci M, Canıtez F, Gökaşar I (2018) WASPAS and TOPSIS based interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method for a selection of a car sharing station. Sustain Cities Soc 41:777–791

    Google Scholar 

  83. Garg H, Shahzadi G, Akram M (2020) Decision-making analysis based on Fermatean fuzzy Yager aggregation operators with application in COVID-19 testing facility. Math Probl Eng 2020:1–16

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  84. Chodha V et al (2022) Selection of industrial arc welding robot with TOPSIS and entropy MCDM techniques. Mater Today Proc 50:709–715

    Google Scholar 

  85. Bera B et al (2022) Susceptibility of deforestation hotspots in Terai-Dooars belt of Himalayan Foothills: a comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS models. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci 34(10):8794–8806

    Google Scholar 

  86. Youssef AE (2020) An integrated MCDM approach for cloud service selection based on TOPSIS and BWM. IEEE Access 8:71851–71865

    Google Scholar 

  87. Halabi Y et al (2022) Causal factors and risk assessment of fall accidents in the US construction industry: a comprehensive data analysis (2000–2020). Saf Sci 146:105537

    Google Scholar 

  88. Mohandes SR et al (2022) A comprehensive analysis of the causal factors in repair, maintenance, alteration, and addition works: a novel hybrid fuzzy-based approach. Expert Syst Appl 208:118112

    Google Scholar 

  89. Mohandes SR et al (2022) Causal analysis of accidents on construction sites: a hybrid fuzzy Delphi and DEMATEL approach. Saf Sci 151:105730

    Google Scholar 

  90. Gunduz M, Khader BK (2020) Construction project safety performance management using analytic network process (ANP) as a multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) tool. Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2020.

  91. Hatefi SM, Tamošaitienė J (2019) An integrated fuzzy DEMATEL-fuzzy ANP model for evaluating construction projects by considering interrelationships among risk factors. J Civ Eng Manag 25(2):114–131

    Google Scholar 

  92. Bakhtavar E, Yousefi S (2018) Assessment of workplace accident risks in underground collieries by integrating a multi-goal cause-and-effect analysis method with MCDM sensitivity analysis. Stoch Env Res Risk Assess 32(12):3317–3332

    Google Scholar 

  93. Kazaz A, Erbas I, Simsek R (2021) A regional perspective for work accidents: Evaluating the amount of work accidents on a city basis by the help of multi-criteria decision making methods. J Constr Eng Manag Innov 4(1):037–051

    Google Scholar 

  94. Rostamzadeh S et al (2022) An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for identification and prioritization of factors affecting falls from height accidents in construction industry. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 29:1–31

    Google Scholar 

  95. Turskis Z et al (2019) A fuzzy group decision-making model for determining the most influential persons in the sustainable prevention of accidents in the construction SMEs. Int J Comput Commun Control 14(1):90–106

    Google Scholar 

  96. Dos Santos M, de Araújo Costa IP, Gomes CFS (2021) Multicriteria decision-making in the selection of warships: a new approach to the AHP method. Int J Anal Hierarchy Process 13(1).

  97. Bouraima MB et al (2020) A study on the development strategy of the railway transportation system in the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) based on the SWOT/AHP technique. Sci African 8:e00388

    Google Scholar 

  98. Singh V, Kumar V, Singh V (2023) A hybrid novel fuzzy AHP-Topsis technique for selecting parameter-influencing testing in software development. Decis Anal J 6:100159

    Google Scholar 

  99. Ayyildiz E, Taskin Gumus A (2021) Pythagorean fuzzy AHP based risk assessment methodology for hazardous material transportation: an application in Istanbul. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(27):35798–35810

    Google Scholar 

  100. Karasan A et al (2022) Customer-oriented product design using an integrated neutrosophic AHP & DEMATEL & QFD methodology. Appl Soft Comput 118:108445

    Google Scholar 

  101. Dogan O et al (2020) A corridor selection for locating autonomous vehicles using an interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS method. Soft Comput 24:8937–8953

    Google Scholar 

  102. Gündoğdu FK et al (2021) Evaluating public transport service quality using picture fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and linear assignment model. Appl Soft Comput 100:106920

    Google Scholar 

  103. Yilanci V, Candan G, Shah MI (2023) Identifying the roles of energy and economic factors on environmental degradation in MINT economies: a hesitant fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(19):55768–55781

    Google Scholar 

  104. Çetinkaya C et al (2022) An eco-friendly evaluation for locating wheat processing plants: an integrated approach based on interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and COPRAS. Soft Comput 26(9):4081–4102

    Google Scholar 

  105. Sivaprakasam P, Angamuthu M (2023) Generalized Z-fuzzy soft β-covering based rough matrices and its application to MAGDM problem based on AHP method. Decis Mak Appl Manag Eng 6(1):134–152

    Google Scholar 

  106. Jagtap M, Karande P (2023) The m-polar fuzzy set ELECTRE-I with revised Simos’ and AHP weight calculation methods for selection of non-traditional machining processes. Decis Mak Appl Manag Eng 6(1):240–281

    Google Scholar 

  107. Ayyildiz E (2023) Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process-based green supply chain resilience evaluation methodology in post COVID-19 era. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30(15):42476–42494

    Google Scholar 

  108. Özkan B, Erdem M, Özceylan E (2022) Evaluation of Asian countries using data center security index: a spherical fuzzy AHP-based EDAS approach. Comput Secur 122:102900

    Google Scholar 

  109. Salih MM et al (2019) Survey on fuzzy TOPSIS state-of-the-art between 2007 and 2017. Comput Oper Res 104:207–227

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  110. Rani P et al (2020) A novel approach to extended fuzzy TOPSIS based on new divergence measures for renewable energy sources selection. J Clean Prod 257:120352

    Google Scholar 

  111. Zhang Z et al (2022) Interval type-2 fuzzy TOPSIS approach with utility theory for subway station operational risk evaluation. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 13(10):4849–4863

    Google Scholar 

  112. Yucesan M, Gul M (2020) Hospital service quality evaluation: an integrated model based on Pythagorean fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS. Soft Comput 24(5):3237–3255

    Google Scholar 

  113. Rouyendegh BD, Yildizbasi A, Üstünyer P (2020) Intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS method for green supplier selection problem. Soft Comput 24:2215–2228

    Google Scholar 

  114. Jin J, Zhao P, You T (2021) Picture fuzzy TOPSIS method based on CPFRS model: an application to risk management problems. Sci Program 2021:1–15

    Google Scholar 

  115. Kutlu Gündoğdu F, Kahraman C (2021) Optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station by using spherical fuzzy TOPSIS method. In: Decision Making with Spherical Fuzzy Sets. 2021, Springer. pp 201–216.

  116. Abdullah L et al (2020) Application of interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS for flood management. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38(1):873–881

    Google Scholar 

  117. Ayağ Z, Samanlioglu F (2021) A hesitant fuzzy linguistic terms set-based AHP-TOPSIS approach to evaluate ERP software packages. Int J Intell Comput Cybern 14(1):54–77

    Google Scholar 

  118. Reig-Mullor J et al (2022) Evaluating ESG corporate performance using a new neutrosophic AHP-TOPSIS based approach. Technol Econ Dev Econ 28(5):1242–1266

    Google Scholar 

  119. Narang M, Kumar A, Dhawan R (2023) A fuzzy extension of MEREC method using parabolic measure and its applications. J Dec Anal Intell Comput 3(1):33–46

    Google Scholar 

  120. Ahmed S (2019) Causes and effects of accident at construction site: a study for the construction industry in Bangladesh. Int J Sustain Constr Eng Technol 10(2):18–40

    Google Scholar 

  121. Ahmed S (2019) Causes of accident at construction sites in Bangladesh. Organ Technol Manag Constr Int J 11(1):1933–1951

    Google Scholar 

  122. Jung S, Woo J, Kang C (2020) Analysis of severe industrial accidents caused by hazardous chemicals in South Korea from January 2008 to June 2018. Saf Sci 124:104580

    Google Scholar 

  123. Ahmed S, Sobuz MHR, Haque MI (2018) Accidents on construction sites in Bangladesh: a review. In: 4th International Conference on Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development (ICCESD 2018)

  124. Pathak SK et al (2022) Prioritization of barriers to the development of renewable energy technologies in India using integrated Modified Delphi and AHP method. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 50:101818

    Google Scholar 

  125. Yildiz A et al (2020) A modified balanced scorecard based hybrid pythagorean fuzzy AHP-topsis methodology for ATM site selection problem. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 19(02):365–384

    Google Scholar 

  126. Yildiz A et al (2021) A framework to prioritize the public expectations from water treatment plants based on trapezoidal type-2 fuzzy ahp method. Environ Manage 67(3):439–448

    Google Scholar 

  127. Alkan N, Kahraman C (2022) Prioritization of supply chain digital transformation strategies using multi-expert fermatean fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Informatica pp 1–33

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610031, People’s Republic of China

    Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima & Yanjun Qiu

  2. Highway Engineering Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610031, People’s Republic of China

    Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima & Yanjun Qiu

  3. Department of Industrial Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University, 61080, Trabzon, Turkey

    Ertugrul Ayyildiz

  4. Department of Industrial Engineering, Istanbul Beykent University, 34398, Istanbul, Turkey

    Selin Yalcin

  5. The Libyan Academy-Misurata, Misurata, Libya

    Ibrahim Badi

  6. Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Eldoret, Eldoret, Kenya

    Clement Kiprotich Kiptum

  7. Organization of African Academic Doctors (OAAD), P.O. Box 14833-00100, Langata, Nairobi, Kenya

    Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima & Abibata Gore

Authors
  1. Mouhamed Bayane Bouraima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abibata Gore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ertugrul Ayyildiz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Selin Yalcin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ibrahim Badi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Clement Kiprotich Kiptum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yanjun Qiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ertugrul Ayyildiz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethics approval

Ethics committee approval is not required.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publish

The authors confirm that the final version of the manuscript has been reviewed, approved, and consented to for publication by all authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 39 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bouraima, M.B., Gore, A., Ayyildiz, E. et al. Assessing of causes of accidents based on a novel integrated interval-valued Fermatean fuzzy methodology: towards a sustainable construction site. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 21725–21750 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-08948-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-023-08948-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation