Evaluation of the Difficulties in the Internet of Things (IoT) with Multi-Criteria Decision-Making

被引:34
作者
Uslu, Buse [1 ]
Eren, Tamer [1 ]
Gur, Seyda [1 ]
Ozcan, Evrencan [1 ]
机构
[1] Kirikkale Univ, Ind Engn, Fac Engn, TR-71450 Kirikkale, Turkey
关键词
Internet of Things; IoT; multi-criteria decision-making; analytic network process; analytic hierarchy process;
D O I
10.3390/pr7030164
中图分类号
TQ [化学工业];
学科分类号
0817 ;
摘要
The rapid development of technology has increased the desire of all to be on the Internet. The discovery that objects born of the Internet communicate with each other without external factors revealed, with the fourth industrial revolution, the concept of the Internet of Things (IoT). The communication of objects with each other means minimum labor and minimum cost for enterprises. Enterprises that want to transition to the Internet of Things face many difficulties. Identifying and correcting these difficulties can lead to both lost time and high cost. In this study, we investigated the difficulties encountered in the Internet of Things. As a result of the study, the degree of importance of the factors causing these difficulties was determined by multi-criteria decision-making methods and was presented to the enterprises. The main criteria, and the sub-criteria related to these main criteria, were determined. The main purpose of the enterprises transitioning to Industry 4.0 is the communication of things with each other. In this study, we aimed to determine which criteria caused difficulties in the transition to Industry 4.0. Then, the degree of importance of the criteria was determined using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and analytic network process (ANP) methods, in the multi-criteria decision-making. Through the study, we determined which criteria should be taken into consideration by the enterprises that want to transition to the Internet of Things. In this way, enterprises will be able to accelerate that transition by minimizing time and monetary loss.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
[42]   Multi-criteria Decision-Making for Greenways: The Case of Trabzon, Turkey [J].
Turk, Ersin .
PLANNING PRACTICE AND RESEARCH, 2018, 33 (03) :326-343
[43]   Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection [J].
Richard Edgar Hodgett .
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016, 85 :1145-1157
[44]   A MODEL BASED ON INFLUENCE DIAGRAMS FOR MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING [J].
Sedki, Karima ;
Delcroix, Veronique .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS, 2012, 21 (04)
[45]   Wastewater Treatment and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods: A Review [J].
Sharma, Tina ;
Kumar, Anuj ;
Pant, Sangeeta ;
Kotecha, Ketan .
IEEE ACCESS, 2023, 11 :143704-143720
[46]   Integrated process capability and multi-criteria decision-making approach [J].
Dagsuyu, Cansu ;
Polat, Ulviye ;
Kokangul, Ali .
SOFT COMPUTING, 2021, 25 (10) :7169-7180
[47]   APPLICATION OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHODS IN DESTINATION BENCHMARKING [J].
Lusticky, Martin ;
Vachova, Lucie ;
Kaderabkova, Jaroslava .
15TH INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON REGIONAL SCIENCES, 2012, :379-387
[48]   Hospital performance management: A multi-criteria decision-making approach [J].
Tyagi, Aman ;
Singh, Preetvanti .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, 2019, 12 (04) :286-291
[49]   Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method [J].
Rezaei, Jafar .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2015, 53 :49-57
[50]   MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHODS AND THEIR APPLICATIONS FOR HUMAN RESOURCES [J].
D'Urso, Maria Grazia ;
Masi, Daniele .
ISPRS Workshop of Commission VI 1-3, Advances in Web-based Education Services, 2015, 46 (W1) :31-37