Volume 20, Issue 1 (2016)                   MJSP 2016, 20(1): 1-20 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Pashanejad E. Validity Evaluation MADM Methods for Suitable Urban Spheres Development in the Azarshahr Shahrestan. MJSP 2016; 20 (1) :1-20
URL: http://hsmsp.modares.ac.ir/article-21-2428-en.html
Abstract:   (9121 Views)
Spatial Planning _______________________________________________ Vol.20, No.1, Spring 2016 264 Validity Evaluation MADM Methods for Suitable Urban Spheres Development in the Azarshahr Shahrestan Mehdi Pourtaheri1, Ehsan Pashanzhad2*, Hassan Ahmadi3 1 Associate Professor of Geography and Rural Planning, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran 2. Land use planning Graduate Student, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran 3. Assistant Professor of Geography and Urban Planning, University of Tarbiat Modares, Tehran, Iran Received: 2014/July/30 Accept: 2015/Jan/17 Recently, MADM methods of spatial analysis has been expanded in Arc GIS. MADM methods are powerful set of techniques and processes to designing, evaluating and ordering decision alternatives. The purpose of the research is validity valuation of MADM methods in suitable urban spheres development of study area. We selected 8 criteria (slope, aspect, elevation, land use, distance of: river, city areas, main roads and fault). Method of research is descriptive–analytical. We used the AHP model in the software of Expert Choice for weighting the criteria. There are many MADM methods. In this paper we used four models (SAW, TOPSIS, VIKOR and AHP). Then the above models are used to evaluate the criteria in case study by Arc GIS software. In this article also each model classified to 5 classes (very unsuitable, unsuitable, moderately suitable, suitable and highly suitable). Finally, the overall accuracy and kappa coefficient in ERDAS IMAGINE software used for assessment validity of techniques. According to the kappa coefficient, AHP is 83.14% in the first rate. By comparing the results of each model AHP is the most appropriate.   Azarshahr Shahrestan. * Corresponding Author's E-mail: Ehsanpasha90@gmail.com
Full-Text [PDF 622 kb]   (3002 Downloads)    

Received: 2015/02/24 | Accepted: 2015/06/5 | Published: 2016/05/21

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.