[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Next Article in Journal
Complex Uncertainty of Surface Data Modeling via the Type-2 Fuzzy B-Spline Model
Previous Article in Journal
Exploring the Effect of Status Quo, Innovativeness, and Involvement Tendencies on Luxury Fashion Innovations: The Mediation Role of Status Consumption
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Mathematics
Volume 9
Issue 9
10.3390/math9091052
mathematics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Design of a Computer-Aided Location Expert System Based on a Mathematical Approach

by
Martin Straka
Institution of Logistics and Transport, Faculty BERG, Technical University of Kosice, Park Komenskeho 14, 042 00 Kosice, Slovakia
Mathematics 2021, 9(9), 1052; https://doi.org/10.3390/math9091052
Submission received: 28 March 2021 / Revised: 2 May 2021 / Accepted: 4 May 2021 / Published: 7 May 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Engineering Mathematics)
Browse Figures
Graphical abstract
"> Figure 1
<p>Steps of the calculation procedure.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Calculation of the direct distance between places in the distribution region.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Graphical representation of the solution of the distribution centre’s location.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Graphical display of a task solution that matches the diagonal intersection.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Image resolution is the basis for the data input into the location calculation.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Recording input data about location positions used in the location calculation.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Setting the required location calculation parameters.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Results of the calculation of the location of the point on the area in the proposed expert system.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Input data and calculation settings for calculating the optimal point location on the surface based on <a href="#mathematics-09-01052-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Graphical display of the results and procedure for calculating iterations via the computer-aided location expert system that the author created.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Positions of the places of supply of GAMA, Inc. Secovce in eastern Slovakia.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Setting the required location calculation parameters, and the parameters of the raw material quantities and unit prices to be inserted into the expert system.</p> "> Figure 16
<p>Graphical display of the solution of the case study location problem, obtained using the computer-aided location expert system.</p> "> Figure 17
<p>Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This article discusses how to calculate the location of a point on a surface using a mathematical approach on two levels. The first level uses the traditional calculation procedure via Cooper’s iterative method through a spreadsheet editor and a classic result display map. The second level uses the author-created computer-aided location expert system on the principle of calculation using Cooper’s iterative method with the direct graphical display of results. The problem is related to designing a practical computer location expert system, which is based on a new idea of using the resolution of a computer map as an image to calculate location. The calculated results are validated by comparing them with each other, and the defined accuracy for a particular example was achieved at the 32nd iteration with the position optima DC[x(32);y(32)] = [288.8;82.7], with identical results. The location solution in the case study to the defined accuracy was achieved at the 6th iteration with the position optima DC[x(6);y(6)] = [274;220]. The calculations show that the expert system created achieves the required parameters and is a handy tool for determining the location of a point on a surface.

Graphical Abstract">

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Finding savings and reducing costs in various areas is an important aspect that can provide companies and businesses with a permanent presence in the market and a competitive advantage. Savings related to the efficient location of warehouses, businesses, operations, etc., can significantly reduce the overall cost of operating the system. For this reason, the solution of the location problem and the creation of an expert system is highly topical and very important, giving the possibility of solving the location to ordinary users without the need for highly specialised knowledge.
Location is of strategic and economic importance. Therefore, a decision about where to build a distribution or supply warehouse, logistics centre, or production plant is crucial and strategic. Decisions on this matter are strategic, long-term and fundamentally affect the distribution site’s functioning and economics. Unnecessarily extended distribution routes require more time, more fuel, more servicing and more costs. Incorrect decisions lead to increased costs based on the particular implementation of distribution [1].
As part of this paper, we look at the computer-aided location (CAL) system design, which uses a traditional approach to the location using Cooper’s iterative method. The problem is related to creating an effective computer location expert system built on a new idea of using computer map resolution for location calculation purposes. The results obtained through the calculation of the created expert system are compared with those calculated following the conventional procedure. This research and the paper in question highlight the possibilities available for solving the problem of location using mathematics and computing.
If we establish a business, or if we want to extend the operations of an existing firm into other regions or increase the effectiveness of existing shops, it is important to make the correct choice of location for the company, distribution centre or warehouse. Researchers, for the needs of efficient logistics solutions, often deal with the solution of the optimal location, and many authors describe their procedures in their works. The most well-known ones are the theories of location and layout by von Thünen, Launhardt, Weber, Christaller, Lösch, Moses and others. According to von Thünen [2], transportation costs over plains are related only to distance travelled and volume shipped. He also addressed the location of intensive versus extensive agriculture in relation to the same market. According to Launhardt [3], all other things being equal, the size of the sales area is a function of the ex-works price and the transport costs, which affects the location. According to Weber [4], a production plant will choose the least costly locations in operation and development. Transport costs are proportional to the weight of the goods and the distance that raw materials or finished products have to travel. According to Christaller [5], central place theory, in geography, is an element of location theory concerning the size and distribution of central places and settlements within a system. Central place theory attempts to illustrate how settlements are located in relation to one another, the amount of market area a central place can control, and why some central places function as hamlets, villages, towns, or cities. According to Lösch [6], location is based on a balanced state with the following conditions: the location of each enterprise is characterised by the maximum possible benefits to consumers and producers; enterprises are positioned in such a way that the area is fully used, there is equality of prices and costs, and all areas of the market have a minimum size in the shape of a hexagon. Moses [7] made the theory of location an integral part of the theory of production and investigated the implications of factor substitution for the locational equilibrium of the firm. His main conclusion is that profit maximisation requires proper adjustments of the output and input combination, location, and price. Moreover, optimising the values of these three variables can be achieved by analytical tools derived directly from traditional economic theory. Beckmann [8] assumed that the point where marginal revenue equals marginal cost corresponds to output, obtained with the price, where the seller sets the factory price. The buyer arranges freight, and the average net revenue is equal to the price. According to Malindzak [9], location is understood as the location of a manufacturing process, an enterprise, the location of a distribution centre, the positioning of manufacturing operations in the workplace, and the location of a single-purpose machine or piece of equipment. According to Straka [10], location is the definition a particular place for the needs of specific use with effective cost-utilisation. According to Shavarani et al. [11], a solution to the facility location problem is expected to choose facility locations such that maximum profit and customer satisfaction are acquired.
The correct position of a company in an area has a significant impact on transport costs, the time needed for distribution, and all associated activities. According to Wen et al. [12], especially with the development of transportation, an optimal location for the centralised depot can significantly improve the comprehensive economic benefit of the support system.
Location is dependent on many factors that must be considered when choosing the right place. According to Barojas-Payan et al. [13], the location of the warehouses must be optimal, and the evaluation process for strategic decisions involves varied aspects and criteria. Where the choice of the location of a production process, or a distribution or operational centre, depends on many factors, some of which can be economically assessed and other cannot be, it is appropriate to use one of the multicriteria decision-making methods. According to Mardani et al. [14], multicriteria decision-making is considered a complex decision-making tool involving quantitative and qualitative factors. The location problem is generally understood as a multicriteria decision-making problem. According to Chen et al. [15], location selection is a multicriteria problem requiring appropriate methodology. Multicriteria decision-making techniques can be applied to handle location selection issues, considering multiple conflicting criteria. Solving various tasks using multicriteria decision-making methods is one of the most common approaches. According to Kolios et al. [16], the successful selection of the most appropriate multicriteria methodology should consider a range of different perspectives to comprehend all sides of the problem and, when necessary, consider inter-connections among the criteria. Solving the problem of location using multicriteria decision-making is also an important area both in science and in practice [17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. According to Chou et al. [24], the location decision has drawn increasing attention from academic and business communities in the past two decades. It has been well recognised that the selection of a facility’s location has critical strategic implications because a location decision will typically involve a long-term commitment of resources.
Another approach that can be used in solving the location, and which is also used for creating an expert location system, is the mathematical/geometric approach. The historical development of the perception of location shows the overall importance of location solutions for companies, enterprises and society in the past and today. The importance of solving the problem of location with the occurrence of new local or global crises is significantly increasing. Thus, it is crucial to create an expert system that helps determine the location under freely definable conditions and constraints.

2. Literature Review

Researchers have been dealing with defining a universal procedure for determining the optimal location for a long time. This issue has had and will continue to play an important role in science, research and practice. Since there are a number of different factors that affect the solution of the optimum location, the solution procedure may be different. The reasons have always been the same: minimising the required costs while maximising the activity’s efficiency. We have stated the points of view of various authors on location earlier. In the following sections, we will focus on analysing the works of authors who deal with the solution of the location from a practical point of view.
Production companies on the market are forced to optimise their production processes and increase their productivity. One of the factors influencing the services associated with ensuring efficient production, according to many authors, is the location of maintenance [25,26,27,28]. According to Malec et al. [29], the proper location of facilities for maintenance activities is of critical importance for uninterrupted operation.
The correct location of warehouses, the number of different warehouses located within the company and chain (input warehouses, warehouses for material and raw materials, warehouses for work in progress, warehouses for finished products, shipping warehouses), and the quantity of raw materials and various products stored in them are all significant from the functional point of view of the activities of manufacturing companies [30,31,32,33]. According to Ehsanifar et al. [34], to effectively manage large industrial companies, decision-making regarding the location of distribution warehouses is significant. Locating distribution warehouses is a multicriteria problem in which several quantitative and qualitative criteria influence the decision-making process.
Another critical question is manufacturing location, which plays an important role in production resources and supply chain management. The solution of such location problems must consider both the needs and requirements of suppliers and the needs and requirements of production itself, as well as the needs and requirements of customers [35,36,37,38]. According to Theyel and Hofmann [39], the manufacturing location is operationally and strategically crucial for multinational companies. The spatial dispersion of manufacturing is determined by firm-specific and external factors, both of which are subject to constant change.
The mathematical procedure for calculating the coordinates of the optimal location of the position of a warehouse, for production, a company, a machine or a facility, requires some knowledge of the issue. With multiple elements entering the calculation, it is virtually impossible to solve it without some computing. One option for efficient computation is to use a spreadsheet editor. This method requires theoretical knowledge of the location solution procedure and practical experience working with a spreadsheet editor. The second way is to create a location program as an expert system. For the system user, this is the easiest way to solve the location of objects without theoretical knowledge. According to Todorov and Stoinov [40], expert systems are among the leading research domains of artificial intelligence. They are applications developed to solve complex problems in a particular area, at the level of extraordinary human intelligence and expertise.
From the perspective of the creator of an expert system, it is necessary to have both pieces of knowledge, of the location and the calculation procedure, and to understand some programming language in which such a system could be created. The issue of expert systems is not new. However, it is developing in different directions and very quickly. At present, we encounter expert systems at virtually every step. What are expert systems anyway?
Simply put, expert systems are algorithms or procedures that provide solutions at the level of a human expert. Expert systems are oriented towards different areas. They can be problem-oriented, problem-independent, programmatically open, or programmatically closed [41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48]. According to Shokouhyar et al. [49], the primary goal of expert systems is to implement the knowledge acquisition process by converting knowledge to wisdom.
In terms of their structure, expert systems consist of a knowledge base, a database, a communication interface, user support and an inference mechanism. Each of the defined parts of expert systems has its structure. Hsu et al. [50] use heuristic rules as a basis for their proposed expert system. The authors state that the expert system can identify the location of a fault very efficiently. Therefore, it can serve as a valuable tool to help distribution system dispatchers determine the areas of defects. According to Kim et al. [51], heuristics is the core of an expert system for designing distribution systems. The authors Tang, Shi and Wang use the Bayesian network technique [52] as their basis of knowledge for creating the expert system. Other authors Bachár and Makyšová [53] use the Expert Choice Program, an expert system, to solve a multicriteria evaluation task using their database. Warszawski and Peled [54] point to the possibilities of designing an expert system for the planning and implementation of construction projects.
The creation, development and design of various systems, expert systems and programs that solve defined problems requires their verification on practical tasks. Many authors in their articles prove their theoretical statements and laboratory research results on specific application tasks [11,55,56,57,58,59]. According to Alizadeh et al. [60], the experimental results reveal some practical insights confirming the importance of response decisions in an uncertain environment. Additionally, within the given article, the research results are verified by application to a case study.
Finding out whether the defined assumptions, experiences, and solutions from research and development, which are implemented in the created expert system, are functional and reliable, is justified as the main goal when creating a trustworthy system. Many developed systems are narrowly specialised and applicable only for a given area, or just in individual cases [61,62,63,64,65]. Verifying the correctness of these systems is all the more complicated. In general, the practical use of created expert systems in solving specific tasks allows creators to identify errors and shortcomings and realise their elimination or correction. Some errors may occur only after solving many tasks, depending on the parameters of the investigated systems. It follows that the use (that is, the testing and demonstration of problem-solving in practice) has its important place in the creation and development of systems for practical and educational purposes [66,67,68,69,70].
From the literature analysis in question, it can be stated that the question of location and creating expert systems to solve it are justified and important.

3. Materials and Methods

The issue of mathematical procedures for calculating optimal location has been evolving for several decades. One of the first scientific, mathematical approaches to solving a location was created by Cooper [71]. The approach of creating expert systems for solving location issues based on mathematical methodology is young. The main developments was recorded mainly in the period from the beginning of the 21st century. Our mathematical model for solving optimal location uses criteria such as the quantity of transported material, the price per unit of transported quantity of material, and the distance between two points as a solution of a right-angled triangle.
Mathematical methods aim to calculate the optimal location within the region for operations management, a distribution centre or a warehouse. The costs of a connection between the calculated centre and existing sites are as low as possible. The basis of the technique is to minimise the chosen cost criterion, which is most commonly used for assessment.

3.1. Problem Description

This paper deals with the optimal position of a point on a surface using a mathematical approach, which is used for the design of an expert location system. In general, the problem can be characterised as finding the point of optimality in an area that is represented by a specific map of the distribution region with its suppliers and customers. Within a particular region, it is necessary to define a point for the solution of efficient supply and distribution. When the supply and distribution are realised, the costs are the lowest. We assume that supply and distribution are realised under the same conditions and with statistically defined quantities of transported goods at their unit prices. The aim is to determine the optimal location of the point for the implementation of supply and distribution. In general terms, the problem is characterised in Figure 1.

3.2. Mathematical Formulation

The solution makes the following assumptions:
-
each point entering the calculation has fixed distribution costs, which are formed by the product of the transported quantity of material and the unit price for the transport of the material;
-
there is one common distribution centre for each point;
-
the distribution centre is responsible for carrying out supply and distribution;
-
the optimisation function depends on the transported quantity of material, the unit price per material, the distance between the point of receipt of the material and the point of dispatch.
The model sets, parameters, decision variables, and intermediate variables used throughout the paper are listed as follows:
Indices:
I: Index for customers, i = 1, 2, 3, … I
P: Index for iterations, potential distribution centre locations, p = 1, 2, 3, … P
Parameters:
Mi: Transported material quantity between customers and distribution centre (pcs)
Ci: Cost of transport of a material unit between customers and distribution centre (EUR)
dip: The distance from customer i to potential distribution centre p (km)
xi: The value of the x coordinate of the customer i
yi: The value of the y coordinate of the customer i
ε: The value of the calculation accuracy
Variables:
Hp: The value of the optimal distance of the potential distribution centre in the direction of the x-axis, the value of the partial derivative of the iteration p
Ap: The value of the partial derivative of the iteration p
Rp: The value of the optimum distance of the possible potential distribution centre in the direction of the y-axis, the value of the partial derivative of the iteration p
Bp: The value of the partial derivative of the iteration p
x(p): The value of the x coordinate of the potential distribution centre of the iteration p
y(p): The value of the y coordinate of the potential distribution centre of the iteration p
∆Xp: The value of the sum of lengths of the x-axis from a distribution centre of the iteration p
∆Yp: The value of the sum of lengths of the y-axis from a distribution centre of the iteration p
Using the described assumptions and definitions. The problem can be modelled as the following formulation:
M i n ∑ i M i C i d i p       ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
The steps of the calculation procedure for creating an expert system can be divided into the parts of obtaining and preparing the necessary data, preparing the location modelling area, implementing data and setting calculations, the realisation of location calculations, and displaying the obtained results on the modelling area and in numerical expression (Figure 1).
The necessary data for calculating the optimum location must be obtained from the analysis of the investigated system, e.g., the statistics quantity of the transported material and the price per unit of transported quantity of material. Data that define the coordinates of the points for entering into the calculation, such as the coordinates of customers, must be obtained from the prepared location modelling area, e.g., the map. Using the map on which the points are marked, the origin of the coordinate system is defined, the x- and y-axes are labelled, and we measure the coordinates of individual points (Figure 2). The created location modelling surface serves as a means of obtaining input data and visually displaying the solution of the location of a point on the surface. The realisation of a mathematical calculation of the optimal location of a point on a surface is follows. The distances between the potential location and individual customers are inserted into the defined objective function after the distance dip.
In this approach, the distances between locations and distribution centres are replaced by a direct connection, which may be calculated as the diagonal of a right-angled triangle (Figure 3).
Individual distances between a distribution centre and places (2) can be calculated as follows:
c 2 = a 2 + b 2 ⇒ d i p 2 = ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ⇒ d i p = ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2   ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
The distance expressed above is applied to the objective function of location optimality (3).
z = M i n ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2       ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
As it is necessary to obtain the optimal coordinates for the location of a distribution centre, it must hold that the derivative of the objective function by x is equal to 0, and that the derivative of the objective function by y is equal to 0 (4):
∂ z ∂ x = 0   ∩   ∂ z ∂ y = 0
An iterative calculation follows the value of the partial derivative (5), which gives us a value for the optimum distance in the x-axis direction.
∂ z ∂ x = ∑ i M i C i 1 2 [ ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ] − 1 2 ( 2 x ( p ) − 2 x i ) = ∑ i 2 M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2        = ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 = H p ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
The calculation of the new coordinate x(p) of a distribution centre is denoted as:
A p = ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ⇒ H p = A p ∑ i ( x ( p ) − x i ) ⇒ ∑ i ( x ( p ) − x i ) = H p A p ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
∑ i ( x ( p ) − x i ) (6) denotes the value of the sum of customers lengths of the x-axis from the potential distribution centre of the iteration p. The new value for the optimum coordinate x of the distribution centre (7) is calculated as the difference from the old value x(p-1) and the distance ∆Xp from the distribution centre,
x ( p ) = x ( p − 1 ) − Δ X p  
The calculation of the coordinate y(p) progresses in the same way.
An iterative calculation follows the value of the partial derivative (8), which gives us a value for how far is optimum on the y-axis.
∂ z ∂ x = ∑ i M i C i 1 2 [ ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ] − 1 2 ( 2 y ( p ) − 2 y i ) = ∑ i 2 M i C i ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2         = ∑ i M i C i ( y ( p ) − y i ) ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 = R p ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
The calculation of a new coordinate y(p) of a distribution centre.
B p = ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 ⇒ R p = B p ∑ i ( y ( p ) − y i ) ⇒ ∑ i ( y ( p ) − y i ) = R p B p = Δ Y p ∀   i ∈ I ,   p ∈ P
∑ i ( y ( p ) − y i ) (9) denotes the sum of distances on the y-axis from a distribution centre. The new value for the optimum coordinate y of the distribution centre (10) is calculated as the difference from the old value y(p−1) and the distance ∆Yp from the distribution centre,
y ( p ) = y ( p − 1 ) − Δ Y p  
During the iterative calculation, the last calculated coordinates of the optimal point are always used. The calculation procedure is based on the utopian point method. The utopian point method means that during the calculation of the x coordinate, y is considered to be optimal, and subsequently, during the calculation of the y coordinate, x is considered to be optimal.
Two approaches can define initial values of the coordinates x(0) and y(0) of the optimal point. The first approach is the calculation of the initial coordinate values, which lead to the need for fewer iterations. The second approach involves directly specified initial values, e.g., x(0) = 0, y(0) = 0 => DC[x(0);y(0)] = [0;0]. The initial values (11) according the first approach can be calculated as:
x ( 0 ) = ∑ i M i C i x i ∑ i M i C i ,   y ( 0 ) = ∑ i M i C i y i ∑ i M i C i   ∀   i ∈ I
The iterative calculation ends when the chosen accuracy of calculation ε is achieved, (12)–(15). The calculation ends when accuracy is achieved by some of the possibilities [72]:
  • based on the x-axis,
Δ x = | x ( p ) − x ( p − 1 ) | ≤ ε
  • based on the y-axis,
Δ y = | y ( p ) − y ( p − 1 ) | ≤ ε
  • based on the x- and y-axes simultaneously,
Δ x = | x ( p ) − x ( p − 1 ) | ≤ ε ∩ Δ y = | y ( p ) − y ( p − 1 ) | ≤ ε
  • based on the objective function change z,
Δ z = | z ( p ) − z ( p − 1 ) | = | ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p ) − y i ) 2 − ∑ i M i C i ( x ( p − 1 ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( p − 1 ) − y i ) 2 | ≤ ε   ∀   i ∈ I  
  • based on the change in the movement of the calculated coordinates—the calculation ends when the values of the calculated coordinates of two successive iterations do not change, e.g., the values of calculated coordinates are identical.

4. Results and Discussion

The previous chapters described how to calculate the location in a specific area of a point representing a business, warehouse, or some object in general. As part of the new solution to the problem, we compare the results of solving the same task with a traditional approach and using our created expert system based on the author’s idea to use map resolution as the basis for input data in the calculation of location.

4.1. Location using Direct Distance, Cooper’s Iteration Method, Traditional Approach

The classic procedure of location calculating depends on the map, the skill of the solver, and the classic tools for calculation. The result of the calculation is the coordinates of the optimal location on the surface. The calculated results must be marked on the map. In this traditional way, it is possible to obtain an accurate view and information about the location of a point on the surface. Such a procedure is demanding on the skills and knowledge of the solver. We have will demonstrate this traditional approach using a specific location task, which we will solve with a mathematical approach using Cooper’s iteration method. The data input into the calculation of the distribution centre’s location (DC[x(opt);y(opt)]) between Berlin, Krakow, Prague and Warsaw are shown in Table 1, and the map with which we work is shown in Figure 4.
The first approximation of the optimal coordinates [x(opt);y(opt)] of the searched distribution centre involves the calculation of the coordinate x(1), using the following Formulae (16)–(18):
H 1 = ∑ i = 1 4 M i C i ( x ( 0 ) − x i ) ( x ( 0 ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( 0 ) − y i ) 2 = 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 34 ) ( 0 − 34 ) 2 + ( 0 − 235.7 ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 454.4 ) ( 0 − 454.4 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 16.7 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 100.6 ) ( 0 − 100.6 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 15.6 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 522.8 ) ( 0 − 522.8 ) 2 + ( 0 − 205 ) 2 = − 3.06127
A 1 = ∑ i = 1 4 M i C i ( x ( 0 ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( 0 ) − y i ) 2 = 1 × 1 ( 0 − 34 ) 2 + ( 0 − 235.7 ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 0 − 454.4 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 16.7 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 0 − 100.6 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 15.6 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 0 − 522.8 ) 2 + ( 0 − 205 ) 2 = 0.018
Δ X 1 = H 1 A 1 = − 3.06127 0.018 = − 170.1 ⇒ x ( 1 ) = x ( 0 ) − Δ X 1 = 0 − ( − 170.1 ) = 170.1
Similarly, the value of coordinate y(1) is calculated using formulae R1 and B1. Instead of x(0), the value of the coordinate x(1) is now used in the calculation (19)–(21).
B 1 = ∑ i = 1 4 M i C i ( y ( 0 ) − y i ( x ( 1 ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( 0 ) − y i ) 2 = 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 235.7 ) 2 ( 170.1 − 34 ) 2 + ( 0 − 235.7 ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − ( − 16.7 ) ) ( 170.1 − 454.4 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 16.7 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − ( − 15.6 ) ) ( 170.1 − 100.6 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 15.6 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 × ( 0 − 205 ) ( 170.1 − 522.8 ) 2 + ( 0 − 205 ) 2 = − 1.09075
B 1 = ∑ i = 1 4 M i C i ( x ( 1 ) − x i ) 2 + ( y ( 0 ) − y i ) 2 = 1 × 1 ( 170.1 − 34 ) 2 + ( 0 − 235.7 ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 170.1 − 454.4 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 16.7 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 170.1 − 100.6 ) 2 + ( 0 − ( − 15.6 ) ) 2 + 1 × 1 ( 170.1 − 522.8 ) 2 + ( 0 − 205 ) 2 = 0.02368
Δ Y 1 = R 1 B 1 = − 1.09075 0.02368 = − 46.1 ⇒ y ( 1 ) = y ( 0 ) − Δ Y 1 = 0 − ( − 46.1 ) = 46.1
After the first iteration, the first calculated coordinates are [x(1);y(1)] = [170.1;46.1]. Now, a decision follows as to whether the calculated coordinates are of the required accuracy. The accuracy of the x-axis and y-axis is:
| x ( 1 ) − x ( 0 ) | ≤ ε ∩ | y ( 1 ) − y ( 0 ) | ≤ ε ⇒ | 170.1 − 0 | ≤ 0.01 ∩ | 46.1 − 0 | ≤ 0.01 ⇒ 170.1 ≤ 0.01 ∩ 46.1 ≤ 0.01 ⇒
the condition of the accuracy requirement for finishing the calculation “IS NOT” fulfilled, so the calculation continues to the next iteration.
The calculation of the coordinate x(2) follows, and for that, the already calculated values [x(1);y(1)] are used. This iterative calculation continues until the required accuracy is reached, and the final values of [x;y] are the coordinates sought for the distribution centre. For this case, the results are as follows (Table 2).
The calculated coordinates [x(32);y(32)] = [288.8;82.7] (Figure 5) are the optimum place for the distribution centre, and the condition of calculation accuracy is fulfilled.
Suppose we connect the opposite peaks of the trapezoid. In that case, we find that the calculated coordinates of the distribution centre’s location lie precisely at the intersection of the diagonals (Figure 6). The calculation shows that the optimal location is the position in the area around Wroclaw.

4.2. Location Using Computer-Aided Location Expert System

The calculation procedure described above is not simple from the point of view of the ordinary user. Many companies need to calculate the optimal location of the point on a surface to ensure effective supply or distribution. For this reason, it makes sense to create an expert system that calculates optimal coordinates based on input data.
Since measuring map distances on the computer is impractical, the author has invented a new system. The author uses the image resolution to obtain the primary data for the location calculation.
Each computer image is characterised by its resolution, i.e., the number of pixels per row and column. Thus, in calculating the coordinates for the location of a point in an area, the base unit is not millimetres but pixel points (Figure 7).
Standard programming languages such as Delphi, Lazarus, C++, and others have commands that can provide information about the resolution of the image on the monitor, the mouse cursor position on the desktop, etc. This is the method for getting the necessary data, and the rest is a matter of coding. The information obtained is the primary input data for calculating the optimal location of a point in an area on the computer.
As the CAL expert system’s creator, the author of the article opted for a project based on the free Pascal/Lazarus programming language. The expert system created can also work with image mode, which we use to compare with the results obtained by the procedure in the example in the previous chapter. Via the item “Open file”, it is possible to insert the map (image type jpg., wmf) into the expert system. Clicking the mouse on the position of a point enters the location calculation, and the system records the coordinate of the point as the position of the mouse arrow in the figure (Figure 8). By simply moving the mouse around the image and clicking, it is possible to quickly collect the necessary data for calculating the location.
Before calculating the location in the expert system, it is necessary to set the required calculation parameters, such as calculation accuracy and the initial coordinates of the optima sought (Figure 9).
Calculating the location of a point in an area based on defined input parameters uses the principle of iterations, as shown in the previous chapter. The calculation takes place only after the required accuracy has been defined. In this case, given the map’s resolution, the required accuracy of the calculation was achieved on the 37th iteration. The system plots the result of the calculated optimal position DC[x(37);y(37)] = [1310.4;446.0] directly onto the entered map (Figure 10), which also visually identifies the optimal position. At the given coordinates is the sought optima of the point location on the surface. The result corresponds to the position of the mouse cursor at a given resolution in the figure. When we compare the results between the traditional location solution approach and an approach that uses the image resolution as the input point location parameters for calculation, we find that the optima’s resulting positions are identical. From this, it can be concluded that to calculate the location of a point in an area, as an expert location system, image resolution as the input data source is more practical and as effective as the traditional calculation procedure.
In the previous parts, we have shown that by calculating the optimal point, the position of the point in an area, it is possible to use dimensional units other than length for the mathematical calculation. Graphically, it has been proven that the location is identical to that derived via the traditional solution procedure, despite different values for the dimensions. The question that remains unanswered is whether the quality and calculation procedure of the expert system created for identical input values are the same as in the traditional approach using a spreadsheet.
The results of the location solution using an expert system are compared with the results of the location solution of the traditional procedure. The values (Table 1) from the previous example are used to compare the quality of the calculation of the traditional procedure and the expert system. The data form the input values for the location calculation in the created computer-aided location expert system (Figure 11).
The graphical display of the results and the iteration calculation procedure (Figure 12) prove that the computer-aided location expert system created gives the same results as those achieved using the traditional approach in a spreadsheet editor (Table 2). The results of the conventional procedure of calculating the location point on the surface and the results of the created expert system for the solution of the location point on the surface are identical. The calculated optimum of the distribution centre coordinates is on the position DC[x(32);y(32)] = [288.8;82.7]. The calculation reached the optimum with the required accuracy for the 32nd iteration. By comparing the results, it can be concluded that the expert system created achieves the necessary quality and accuracy for calculating the location of the point in the area.

4.3. Location, Proof of Optimality

The calculation results obtained by the classical procedure and the expert system are identical. It is necessary to prove that the calculated values of the location of the point on the surface are optimal for the given case. We prove the optimality by comparing the calculated values of the objective function for each iteration and different variants of the initial position of the potential distribution centre. Suppose the calculated coordinates are optimum for a given system. In that case, the values of the optimum calculated coordinates when starting the calculation from different starting points should always be the same. To determine the accuracy of the calculated values of the optimum and its proof, we used five random starting points with coordinates DC1[x(0);y(0)] = [0;0], DC2[x(0);y(0)] = [150;−150], DC3[x(0);y(0)] = [−100;100], DC4[x(0);y(0)] = [350;522], and DC5[x(0);y(0)] = [652;−58]. Each calculation was performed with the same system parameters. The calculation procedure and the results of the iterations are shown in Table 3.
The calculated results show that with different initial values of the optimum point on the surface DC[x(0);y(0)], the iterative calculation places the resulting optimum at the same location, with the coordinate value DC[x(32);y(32)] = [288.8;82.7]. It is possible to use any number of different starting points, and the resulting optimum is always at the same coordinates. It follows that the calculated values of coordinates are optimal for this case.
The routing of the calculated optimal coordinates in the individual iterations of the calculations from different starting points is shown in Figure 13. By overlapping the unique curves of the iteration calculation procedure, we find that the resulting optimum is at the same point (Figure 13).

4.4. Location Using Computer-Aided Location Expert System, Case Study

Due to the expansion of the company GAMA, Inc. Secovce in the region of eastern Slovakia, and the shortening of supply and distribution routes, it is necessary to propose a location for a new warehouse that will form the centre within the distribution network. Agricultural crops are distributed for GAMA, Inc. Secovce by a transport company that should transport the products physically to the designated place within a particular time.
As the input raw material for processing is grown seasonally, storing the input raw material for most of the year is necessary. The selection of warehouses, their positions, and the storage cost greatly influence its final price.
The computer-aided location expert system working on the principle of Cooper’s iteration method was used to solve the location of the company distribution centre. The map of the region showing the places of supply was inserted into the expert system. Coordinates were defined for each place of supply by clicking with the mouse on their position on the map (Figure 14, Table 4).
This variation of the calculation considers the capacities of the current places of supply in the distribution system. It does not view them as having equivalent status, i.e., the greater the warehouse capacity, the more important it is within the system. Statistics of the company GAMA are used to define the relevant quantities of stored crops and the price, which also considers transport costs (Table 4) to each place of supply. The defined places’ parameters, incorporating the amount of raw material and unit prices, are also inserted into the expert system. Before calculating the location in the expert system, it is necessary to set the required calculation parameters, such as calculation accuracy and the initial coordinates of the optima sought (Figure 15).
The largest storage capacity is in the silo located in Secovce. Therefore, this is the most critical point in the system, which is confirmed by calculating the location (Figure 16).

4.5. Location, Case Study Proof of Optimality

We prove the optimality by comparing the calculated values of the objective function for each iteration and different variants of the initial position of the potential distribution centre. It is the same procedure as in the example. Suppose the calculated coordinates are optimum for a given case study system. In that case, the values of the optimally calculated coordinates when starting the calculation from different starting points should always be the same. To determine the accuracy of the calculated values of the optimum and its proof, we used five random starting points with coordinates DC1[x(0);y(0)] = [0;0], DC2[x(0);y(0)] = [−25;−38], DC3[x(0);y(0)] = [350;350], DC4[x(0);y(0)] = [−245;−10], and DC5[x(0);y(0)] = [47;−2]. Each calculation is performed with the same system parameters. The calculation procedure and the results of the iterations are shown in Table 5.
The calculated results show that with different initial values of the optimum point on the surface DC[x(0);y(0)], the iterative calculation directs the resulting optimum to the same location point with the coordinate value DC[x(6);y(6)] = [274;220]. It is possible to use any number of different starting points, and the resulting optimum is always at the same coordinate. It follows that the calculated values of coordinates are optimal for this case study.
Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points of the potential distribution centre is shown in Figure 17. By overlapping the unique curves of the iteration calculation procedure, we find that the resulting optimum is at the same point (Figure 17).
The calculation takes place only after the required accuracy has been defined. In this case, the required accuracy of the calculation was achieved at the sixth iteration. The system plots the result of the calculated optimal position DC[x(6);y(6)] = [274;220] directly onto the entered surface (Figure 16), which also visually identifies the optima position.
The solution results show that with the current location of places of supply in eastern Slovakia and the current storage quantities, the site at Secovce is correct for a distribution centre. If the capacity requirements for customer storage increase, it will be necessary to build another central large-capacity warehouse located around the Presov site.
It is interesting to compare the results of some selected mathematical methods, their accuracy, and the variation in the calculated coordinates in terms of further research focussing on a point’s location on a surface. This research idea will be approached in another paper.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, the calculation of the location of a point in an area is performed, i.e., calculating optimal point positions for creating a company, a warehouse, a machine, a process, etc. Two approaches for obtaining results are also shown and compared, and a demonstration of the use of the expert system in solving the case study in practice is also shown. The first is a traditional calculation procedure using a spreadsheet editor. The second involves a calculation procedure using the computer-aided location expert system. Both calculation approaches use the process implemented by Cooper’s iterative location method. The calculated results are validated by comparing them with each other, and the defined level of accuracy for a particular example was achieved at the 32nd iteration with optima of DC position at DC[x(32);y(32)] = [288.8;82.7], with identical results. Proof of optimality for a given case is realised by substituting the calculated values into the objective function at five different variants of the beginning of the iterative calculation. For each case, the resulting values for the optimal location of a point on the surface were identical. The expert system was used in solving dozens of location tasks for practice. This article presents a specific case study that solves the location of the warehouse under defined conditions in a particular region. The solution of the location of the warehouse in the case study to the expressed accuracy was achieved in the sixth iteration, with the position optima at DC[x(6);y(6)] = [274;220]. Proof of optimality for a specific case study was performed in the same way as in the comparative example.
The calculation results show that the expert system created achieves the required parameters and is a fully developed tool for determining the location of a point in an area.
Based on the above, it can be concluded that the traditional method of calculation using a spreadsheet editor requires considerable knowledge of the subject, and also knowledge and skills working with a spreadsheet editor. In creating an expert system, knowledge and skill related to the subject matter and some programming languages are needed. From the user’s point of view, it is more advantageous to use a ready-made expert system, where knowledge of the required parameters is needed.

Funding

This research was funded by the Scientific Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic and the Slovak Academy of Sciences and Cultural and Educational Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic. The submitted paper is a part of the project “Research and development of new smart solutions based on the principles of Industry 4.0, logistics, 3D modelling and simulation for streamlining production in the mining and building industry” VEGA 1/0317/19 and the project “Projects of applied research as a means for the development of new models of education in the study program of industrial logistics” KEGA 016TUKE-4/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The author is thankful to the company 4S go, s.r.o. for the technical support in developing the computer-aided location expert system.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Straka, M. Distribution and Supply Logistics; Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  2. Von Thünen, J.H. Der isolierte Staat (The Isolated State); Perthes: Hamburg, Germany, 1826. [Google Scholar]
  3. Launhardt, W. Die Bestimmung des zweckmässigsten Standortes einer gewerblichen Anlage. Z. Ver. Dtsch. Ing. 1882, 26, 106–115. [Google Scholar]
  4. Weber, A. Über den Standort der Industrien, Tübingen; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1909. [Google Scholar]
  5. Christaller, W. Die Zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland; Fischer: Berlin, Germany, 1933. [Google Scholar]
  6. Losch, A. The Economics of Location; Fischer: Berlin, Germany, 1940. [Google Scholar]
  7. Moses, L.N. Location and the Theory of Production. Q. J. Econ. 1958, 72, 259–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Beckmann, M.J. Location Theory; Random House: New York, NY, USA, 1968. [Google Scholar]
  9. Malindzak, D. Production Logistics I; Stroffek: Kosice, Slovakia, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  10. Straka, M. Distribution Logistics in Examples, 2nd ed.; FBERG TUKE: Kosice, Slovakia, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  11. Shavarani, S.M.; Mosallaeipour, S.; Golabi, M.; İzbirak, G. A congested capacitated multi-level fuzzy facility location problem: An efficient drone delivery system. Comput. Oper. Res. 2019, 108, 57–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wen, M.; Lu, B.; Li, S.; Kang, R. Location and allocation problem for spare parts depots on integrated logistics support. J. Syst. Eng. Electron. 2019, 30, 1252–1259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Barojas-Payán, E.; Sánchez-Partida, D.; Martínez-Flores, J.L.; Gibaja-Romero, D.E. Mathematical Model for Locating a Pre-Positioned Warehouse and for Calculating Inventory Levels. J. Disaster Res. 2019, 14, 649–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mardani, A.; Jusoh, A.; Zavadskas, E.K. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision-making techniques and applications: Two decades review from 1994 to 2014. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 4126–4148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chen, J.; Wang, J.; Baležentis, T.; Zagurskaitė, F.; Streimikiene, D.; Makutėnienė, D. Multicriteria Approach towards the Sustainable Selection of a Teahouse Location with Sensitivity Analysis. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Kolios, A.; Mytilinou, V.; Lozano-Minguez, E.; Salonitis, K. A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs. Energies 2016, 9, 566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Alnahhal, M.; Tabash, M.I.; Ahrens, D. Optimal selection of third-party logistics providers using integer programming: A case study of a furniture company storage and distribution. Ann. Oper. Res. 2021, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ni, W.; Shu, J.; Song, M.; Xu, D.; Zhang, K. A Branch-and-Price Algorithm for Facility Location with General Facility Cost Functions. INFORMS J. Comput. 2021, 33, 86–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Darmian, S.M.; Moazzeni, S.; Hvattum, L.M. Multi-objective sustainable location-districting for the collection of municipal solid waste: Two case studies. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 150, 106965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Eiselt, H.; Marianov, V. Location modeling for municipal solid waste facilities. Comput. Oper. Res. 2015, 62, 305–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Nouri, J.; Maghsoudlou, B.; Aboushahab, Z. Utilization multi attribute decision making models for spatial prioritization and environmental decision making in new towns. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 10, 443–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Bertola, N.J.; Smith, I.F. A methodology for measurement-system design combining information from static and dynamic excitations for bridge load testing. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 463, 114953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Abdelbari, H.; Shafi, K. A System Dynamics Modeling Support System Based on Computational Intelligence. Systems 2019, 7, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Chou, T.Y.; Hsu, C.L.; Chen, M.C. A fuzzy multi-criteria decision model for international tourist hotels location selection. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2008, 27, 293–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. David, J.; Tuhý, T.; Jančíková, Z.K. Method for optimizing maintenance location within the industrial plant. Acta Logist. 2019, 6, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tönissen, D.D.; Arts, J.J.; Shen, Z.J. Maintenance Location Routing for Rolling Stock Under Line and Fleet Planning Uncertainty. Transp. Sci. 2019, 53, 1252–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bhattacharya, B.K.; De, M.; Nandy, S.C.; Roy, S. Constant work-space algorithms for facility location problems. Discret. Appl. Math. 2020, 283, 456–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhang, D.; Yang, S.; Li, S.; Fan, J.; Ji, B. Integrated Optimization of the Location–Inventory Problem of Maintenance Component Distribution for High-Speed Railway Operations. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Malec, M.; Benalcazar, P.; Kaszyński, P. Optimal location of gas network maintenance centres: A case study from Poland. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2020, 83, 103569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sánchez-Sierra, S.T.; Caballero-Morales, S.O.; Sánchez-Partida, D.; Martínez-Flores, J.L. Facility location model with inventory transportation and management costs. Acta Logist. 2018, 5, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Karatas, M.; Kutanoglu, E. Joint optimization of location, inventory, and condition-based replacement decisions in service parts logistics. IISE Trans. 2021, 53, 246–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Yuchi, Q.; Wang, N.; He, Z.; Chen, H. Hybrid heuristic for the location-inventory-routing problem in closed-loop supply chain. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 2021, 28, 1265–1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wu, W.; Zhou, W.; Lin, Y.; Xie, Y.; Jin, W. A hybrid metaheuristic algorithm for location inventory routing problem with time windows and fuel consumption. Expert Syst. Appl. 2020, 166, 114034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ehsanifar, M.; Wood, D.A.; Babaie, A. UTASTAR method and its application in multi-criteria warehouse location selection. Oper. Manag. Res. 2020, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Moradlou, H.; Reefke, H.; Skipworth, H.; Roscoe, S. Geopolitical disruptions and the manufacturing location decision in multinational company supply chains: A Delphi study on Brexit. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2021, 41, 102–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Huo, D.; Chaudhry, H.R. Using machine learning for evaluating global expansion location decisions: An analysis of Chinese manufacturing sector. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 163, 120436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Shafiee-Gol, S.; Kia, R.; Kazemi, M.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R.; Darmian, S.M. A mathematical model to design dynamic cellular manufacturing systems in multiple plants with production planning and location–allocation decisions. Soft Comput. 2021, 25, 3931–3954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Woo, Y.; Kim, E. Analysing location choices of small and large enterprises of electronics-manufacturing industry in Korea. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2020, 27, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Theyel, G.; Hofmann, K.H. Manufacturing location decisions and organizational agility. Multinatl. Bus. Rev. 2021, 29, 166–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Todorov, T.; Stoinov, J. Expert System for Milk and Animal Monitoring. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2019, 10, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Shah, D.S.; Jha, D.K.; Gurram, S.; Suñé-Pou, M.; Garcia-Montoya, E.; Amin, P.D. A new SeDeM-SLA expert system for screening of solid carriers for the preparation of solidified liquids: A case of citronella oil. Powder Technol. 2021, 382, 605–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Rogulj, K.; Pamuković, J.K.; Jajac, N. Knowledge-Based Fuzzy Expert System to the Condition Assessment of Historic Road Bridges. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Dattachaudhuri, A.; Biswas, S.K.; Chakraborty, M.; Sarkar, S. A transparent rule-based expert system using neural network. Soft Comput. 2021, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zhao, L.; Tao, W.; Wang, G.; Wang, L.; Liu, G. Intelligent anti-corrosion expert system based on big data analysis. Anti-Corrosion Methods Mater. 2021, 68, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Choi, D.; Lee, H.; Bok, K.; Yoo, J. Design and implementation of an academic expert system through big data analysis. J. Supercomput. 2021, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sarkar, J.; Al Faruque, A.; Mondal, M.S. Modeling the seam strength of denim garments by using fuzzy expert system. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2021, 16, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nuhu, B.K.; Aliyu, I.; Adegboye, M.A.; Ryu, J.K.; Olaniyi, O.M.; Lim, C.G. Distributed network-based structural health monitoring expert system. Build. Res. Inf. 2021, 49, 144–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gong, K.; Zhang, L.; Ni, D.; Li, H.; Xu, M.; Wang, Y.; Dong, Y. An expert system to discover key congestion points for urban traffic. Expert Syst. Appl. 2020, 158, 113544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Shokouhyar, S.; Seifhashemi, S.; Siadat, H.; Ahmadi, M.M. Implementing a fuzzy expert system for ensuring information technology supply chain. Expert Syst. 2019, 36, e12339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Hsu, Y.Y.; Lu, F.C.; Chien, Y.; Liu, J.; Lin, J.; Yu, P.; Kuo, R. An expert system for locating distribution system faults. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1991, 6, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kim, H.; Ko, Y.; Shon, S. An Expert System for the Electric Power Distribution System Design. IFAC Proc. Vol. 1989, 22, 483–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tang, D.; Shi, J.; Wang, W. Intelligent expert systems for location planning. Appl. Math. Inf. Sci. 2015, 9, 1611–1621. [Google Scholar]
  53. Bachár, M.; Makyšová, H.; Loučanová, E.; Olšiaková, M.; Nosáľová, M.; Štofková-Repková, K. Evaluation of the impact of intelligent logistics elements on the efficiency of functioning internal logistics processes. Acta Technol. 2019, 5, 55–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Warszawski, A.; Peled, N. An Expert System for Crane Selection and Location. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, Haifa, Israel, 22–25 June 1987; pp. 64–75. [Google Scholar]
  55. Teng, M.H. Application of multicriteria decision making for site selection of restaurants: Case study of Pao-San restaurant. J. Living Sci. 2000, 6, 47–62. [Google Scholar]
  56. Kahfi, A.; Seyed-Hosseni, S.M.; Tavakoli-Moghadam, R. A robust optimisation approach for a multi-period location-arc routing problem with time windows: A case study of a bank. Int. J. Nonlinear Analysis Appl. 2021, 12, 157–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lodi, A.; Mossina, L.; Rachelson, E. Learning to handle parameter perturbations in Combinatorial Optimization: An application to facility location. EURO J. Transp. Logist. 2020, 9, 100023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zavadsky, J.; Kozarova, M.; Vinczeova, M.; Tuckova, Z.; Krivosudska, J. How organisational innovations help managers to improve quality of their work: An empirical study. Int. J. Qual. Res. 2018, 12, 905–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wicher, P.; Zapletal, F.; Lenort, R. Sustainability performance assessment of industrial corporation using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Alizadeh, M.; Amiri-Aref, M.; Mustafee, N.; Matilal, S. A robust stochastic Casualty Collection Points location problem. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019, 279, 965–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Samolejova, A.; Feliks, J.; Lenort, R.; Besta, P. A hybrid decision support system for iron ore supply. Metalurgija 2012, 51, 91–93. [Google Scholar]
  62. Antoniou, F.; Aretoulis, G. A multi-criteria decision-making support system for choice of method of compensation for highway construction contractors in Greece. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2018, 19, 492–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Phung, X.L.; Truong, H.S.; Bui, N.T. Expert System Based on Integrated Fuzzy AHP for Automatic Cutting Tool Selection. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Kim, E.W.; Kim, S. Optimum Location Analysis for an Infrastructure Maintenance Depot in Urban Railway Networks. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2021, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, C.N.; Hsueh, M.H.; Lin, D.F. Hydrogen Power Plant Site Selection Under Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision-Making (FMCDM) Environment Conditions. Symmetry 2019, 11, 596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Ali, L.; Khan, S.U.; Golilarz, N.A.; Yakubu, I.; Qasim, I.; Noor, A.; Nour, R. A Feature-Driven Decision Support System for Heart Failure Prediction Based on χ2 Statistical Model and Gaussian Naive Bayes. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2019, 2019, 6314328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  67. Mosallaeipour, S.; Shavarani, S.M.; Steens, C.; Eros, A. A robust expert decision support system for making real estate location decisions, a case of investor-developer-user organization in industry 4.0 era. J. Corp. Real Estate 2019, 22, 21–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wulandari, N.; Abdullah, A.G.; Kustiawan, I. Development of an application of critical thinking skills tools using fuzzy expert system. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2019, 14, 3073–3086. [Google Scholar]
  69. Saderova, J.; Rosova, A.; Behunova, A.; Behun, M.; Sofranko, M.; Khouri, S. Case study: The simulation modelling of selected activity in a warehouse operation. Wirel. Netw. 2021, 7, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wang, C.N.; Van Thanh, N.; Su, C.C. The Study of a Multicriteria Decision Making Model for Wave Power Plant Location Selection in Vietnam. Processes 2019, 7, 650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Cooper, L. Location-Allocation Problems. Oper. Res. 1963, 11, 331–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Straka, M. Distribution Logistics as a Component Part of Micrologistics Model of an Enterprise. Habilitation Thesis, Technical University of Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic, 2007. [Google Scholar]
Mathematics 09 01052 g001 550
Figure 1. Steps of the calculation procedure.
Figure 1. Steps of the calculation procedure.
Mathematics 09 01052 g001
Mathematics 09 01052 g002 550
Figure 2. The location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.
Figure 2. The location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.
Mathematics 09 01052 g002
Mathematics 09 01052 g003 550
Figure 3. Calculation of the direct distance between places in the distribution region.
Figure 3. Calculation of the direct distance between places in the distribution region.
Mathematics 09 01052 g003
Mathematics 09 01052 g004 550
Figure 4. Location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.
Figure 4. Location of a distribution and supply region in the coordinate system.
Mathematics 09 01052 g004
Mathematics 09 01052 g005 550
Figure 5. Graphical representation of the solution of the distribution centre’s location.
Figure 5. Graphical representation of the solution of the distribution centre’s location.
Mathematics 09 01052 g005
Mathematics 09 01052 g006 550
Figure 6. Graphical display of a task solution that matches the diagonal intersection.
Figure 6. Graphical display of a task solution that matches the diagonal intersection.
Mathematics 09 01052 g006
Mathematics 09 01052 g007 550
Figure 7. Image resolution is the basis for the data input into the location calculation.
Figure 7. Image resolution is the basis for the data input into the location calculation.
Mathematics 09 01052 g007
Mathematics 09 01052 g008 550
Figure 8. Recording input data about location positions used in the location calculation.
Figure 8. Recording input data about location positions used in the location calculation.
Mathematics 09 01052 g008
Mathematics 09 01052 g009 550
Figure 9. Setting the required location calculation parameters.
Figure 9. Setting the required location calculation parameters.
Mathematics 09 01052 g009
Mathematics 09 01052 g010 550
Figure 10. Results of the calculation of the location of the point on the area in the proposed expert system.
Figure 10. Results of the calculation of the location of the point on the area in the proposed expert system.
Mathematics 09 01052 g010
Mathematics 09 01052 g011 550
Figure 11. Input data and calculation settings for calculating the optimal point location on the surface based on Table 1.
Figure 11. Input data and calculation settings for calculating the optimal point location on the surface based on Table 1.
Mathematics 09 01052 g011
Mathematics 09 01052 g012 550
Figure 12. Graphical display of the results and procedure for calculating iterations via the computer-aided location expert system that the author created.
Figure 12. Graphical display of the results and procedure for calculating iterations via the computer-aided location expert system that the author created.
Mathematics 09 01052 g012
Mathematics 09 01052 g013 550
Figure 13. Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.
Figure 13. Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.
Mathematics 09 01052 g013
Mathematics 09 01052 g014 550
Figure 14. Positions of the places of supply of GAMA, Inc. Secovce in eastern Slovakia.
Figure 14. Positions of the places of supply of GAMA, Inc. Secovce in eastern Slovakia.
Mathematics 09 01052 g014
Mathematics 09 01052 g015 550
Figure 15. Setting the required location calculation parameters, and the parameters of the raw material quantities and unit prices to be inserted into the expert system.
Figure 15. Setting the required location calculation parameters, and the parameters of the raw material quantities and unit prices to be inserted into the expert system.
Mathematics 09 01052 g015
Mathematics 09 01052 g016 550
Figure 16. Graphical display of the solution of the case study location problem, obtained using the computer-aided location expert system.
Figure 16. Graphical display of the solution of the case study location problem, obtained using the computer-aided location expert system.
Mathematics 09 01052 g016
Mathematics 09 01052 g017 550
Figure 17. Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.
Figure 17. Graphical display of results of the objective function values calculating iterations from five different starting points.
Mathematics 09 01052 g017
Table
Table 1. Input data for calculating the DC location, DC[x(opt);y(opt)], point coordinates, unit quantities, unit prices, and selected accuracy.
Table 1. Input data for calculating the DC location, DC[x(opt);y(opt)], point coordinates, unit quantities, unit prices, and selected accuracy.
PlacesxiyiMiCi
Berlin34.0235.711.0
Krakow454.4−16.711.0
Prague100.6−15.611.0
Warsaw522.8205.011.0
DC[x(0);y(0)]0.00.0
ε0.01
DC[x(opt);y(opt)]??
Table
Table 2. Iteration procedure for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre.
Table 2. Iteration procedure for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre.
HiAiXiRiBiYix(i)y(i)
0.00.0[x(0);y(0)]
−3.061270.01800−170.05033−1.090750.02368−46.05223170.146.1[x(1);y(1)]
−0.557470.02107−26.45652−0.420120.01930−21.77017196.567.8[x(2);y(2)]
−0.422080.01866−22.62340−0.169770.01790−9.48359219.177.3[x(3);y(3)]
−0.303550.01773−17.12337−0.062810.01737−3.61537236.380.9[x(4);y(4)]
−0.221500.01732−12.78887−0.022540.01715−1.31460249.082.2[x(5);y(5)]
−0.164410.01713−9.59778−0.008110.01705−0.47596258.682.7[x(6);y(6)]
−0.123450.01704−7.24399−0.002820.01701−0.16586265.982.9[x(7);y(7)]
−0.093330.01700−5.48856−0.000770.01699−0.04525271.482.9[x(8);y(8)]
−0.070820.01699−4.167830.000050.016990.00311275.582.9[x(9);y(9)]
−0.053840.01699−3.168670.000370.016990.02152278.782.9[x(10);y(10)]
−0.040970.01699−2.410440.000450.017000.02676281.182.9[x(11);y(11)]
−0.031180.01700−1.834100.000450.017010.02619283.082.8[x(12);y(12)]
−0.023740.01701−1.395670.000400.017010.02325284.382.8[x(13);y(13)]
−0.018070.01701−1.062030.000330.017020.01960285.482.8[x(14);y(14)]
−0.013750.01702−0.808110.000270.017020.01602286.282.8[x(15);y(15)]
−0.010470.01702−0.614870.000220.017030.01283286.882.8[x(16);y(16)]
−0.007970.01703−0.467800.000170.017030.01013287.382.8[x(17);y(17)]
−0.006060.01703−0.355900.000130.017030.00792287.782.8[x(18);y(18)]
−0.004610.01703−0.270750.000100.017030.00615287.982.7[x(19);y(19)]
−0.003510.01703−0.205970.000080.017030.00475288.182.7[x(20);y(20)]
−0.002670.01703−0.156680.000060.017040.00365288.382.7[x(21);y(21)]
−0.002030.01704−0.119180.000050.017040.00280288.482.7[x(22);y(22)]
−0.001540.01704−0.090660.000040.017040.00215288.582.7[x(23);y(23)]
−0.001170.01704−0.068960.000030.017040.00164288.682.7[x(24);y(24)]
−0.000890.01704−0.052460.000020.017040.00125288.682.7[x(25);y(25)]
−0.000680.01704−0.039900.000020.017040.00096288.782.7[x(26);y(26)]
−0.000520.01704−0.030350.000010.017040.00073288.782.7[x(27);y(27)]
−0.000390.01704−0.023090.000010.017040.00056288.782.7[x(28);y(28)]
−0.000300.01704−0.017560.000010.017040.00042288.782.7[x(29);y(29)]
−0.000230.01704−0.013360.000010.017040.00032288.782.7[x(30);y(30)]
−0.000170.01704−0.010160.000000.017040.00024288.882.7[x(31);y(31)]
−0.000130.01704−0.007730.000000.017040.00019288.882.7[x(32);y(32)]
Table
Table 3. Iteration procedure and value of the objective functions for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre for different variants.
Table 3. Iteration procedure and value of the objective functions for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre for different variants.
x(i)y(i)z1x(i)y(i)z2x(i)y(i)z3x(i)y(i)z4x(i)y(i)z5
0001356.2150−1501393.1−1001001620.43505221928.8652−581732.2
1170.146.11004.4219.961.2979.3173.786.8997.7292.8124.2977.6366.749.7985.4
2196.567.8986.1235.676.7972.8206.582.5981.3291.092.8967.4349.770.0975.4
3219.177.3977.0248.381.1970.1227.682.0974.5290.385.2966.8335.077.5971.3
4236.380.9972.4258.182.4968.6242.882.4971.1289.983.3966.7323.780.3969.3
5249.082.2969.9265.582.8967.8253.982.7969.2289.682.9966.7315.281.4968.2
6258.682.7968.6271.082.9967.3262.382.9968.1289.482.7966.7308.881.9967.5
7265.982.9967.8275.382.9967.1268.782.9967.5289.382.7966.7304.082.2967.2
8271.482.9967.3278.582.9966.9273.582.9967.2289.282.7966.7300.382.3967.0
9275.582.9967.1281.082.9966.8277.282.9967.0289.182.7966.7297.582.5966.9
10278.782.9966.9282.882.8966.8279.982.9966.9289.082.7966.7295.482.5966.8
11281.182.9966.8284.382.8966.7282.182.9966.8288.982.7966.7293.882.6966.8
12283.082.8966.8285.382.8966.7283.782.8966.8288.982.7966.7292.682.6966.7
13284.382.8966.7286.282.8966.7284.982.8966.7288.982.7966.7291.782.7966.7
14285.482.8966.7286.882.8966.7285.882.8966.7288.982.7966.7291.082.7966.7
15286.282.8966.7287.382.8966.7286.582.8966.7288.882.7966.7290.582.7966.7
16286.882.8966.7287.682.8966.7287.182.8966.7288.882.7966.7290.182.7966.7
17287.382.8966.7287.982.7966.7287.582.8966.7288.882.7966.7289.882.7966.7
18287.782.8966.7288.182.7966.7287.882.8966.7288.882.7966.7289.582.7966.7
19287.982.7966.7288.382.7966.7288.082.7966.7288.882.7966.7289.482.7966.7
20288.182.7966.7288.482.7966.7288.282.7966.7288.882.7966.7289.282.7966.7
21288.382.7966.7288.582.7966.7288.482.7966.7288.882.7966.7289.182.7966.7
22288.482.7966.7288.682.7966.7288.582.7966.7288.882.7966.7289.082.7966.7
23288.582.7966.7288.682.7966.7288.582.7966.7288.882.7966.7289.082.7966.7
24288.682.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.682.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.982.7966.7
25288.682.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.682.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.982.7966.7
26288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.982.7966.7
27288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.982.7966.7
28288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7
29288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7
30288.782.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7
31288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7
32288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7288.882.7966.7
Table
Table 4. Defined coordinates of the places of supply in the calculation, and their unit quantities, unit prices, selected accuracy.
Table 4. Defined coordinates of the places of supply in the calculation, and their unit quantities, unit prices, selected accuracy.
Places of SupplyCoordinates
xiyiMi [t]Ci [EUR/t]
CanaA01150187815212
CecejovceA02691671876212
PresovA031293912010212
BardejovA04139550627212
Vranov nad ToplouA052883202195212
PribenikA06400511235212
SabinovA07694452599212
SecovceA0827422050,000229
DC[x(0);y(0)]0.00.0
ε0.01
DC[x(opt);y(opt)]??
Table
Table 5. Iteration procedure for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre for different variants.
Table 5. Iteration procedure for calculating the optimal position of the distribution centre for different variants.
x(i)y(i)z1x(i)y(i)z2x(i)y(i)z3x(i)y(i)z4x(i)y(i)z5
0004,941,601,890.5−25−385,542,285,851.03503502,311,432,651.2−245−107,809,422,994.447−24,513,132,792.1
1251.9224.4751,713,404.6252.9224.8742,015,962.4264.6240.6750,118,709.3251.5224.5756,192,369.8253.2224.4738,805,322.2
2271.8220.4542,378,018.7271.9220.5541,441,457.0271.9222.0548,615,681.6271.7220.4542,868,553.9271.9220.4541,026,784.6
3273.8220.0521,341,818.0273.8220.0521,263,008.2273.7220.2522,400,158.1273.8220.0521,387,763.5273.8220.0521,219,263.6
4274.0220.0519,399,870.2274.0220.0519,393,257.4274.0220.0519,529,087.0274.0220.0519,404,103.9274.0220.0519,388,865.2
5274.0220.0519,222,003.2274.0220.0519,221,442.9274.0220.0519,236,058.2274.0220.0519,222,392.6274.0220.0519,221,012.4
6274.0220.0519,205,717.1274.0220.0519,205,669.1274.0220.0519,207,161.0274.0220.0519,205,752.9274.0220.0519,205,627.6
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Straka, M. Design of a Computer-Aided Location Expert System Based on a Mathematical Approach. Mathematics 2021, 9, 1052. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9091052

AMA Style

Straka M. Design of a Computer-Aided Location Expert System Based on a Mathematical Approach. Mathematics. 2021; 9(9):1052. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9091052

Chicago/Turabian Style

Straka, Martin. 2021. "Design of a Computer-Aided Location Expert System Based on a Mathematical Approach" Mathematics 9, no. 9: 1052. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9091052

APA Style

Straka, M. (2021). Design of a Computer-Aided Location Expert System Based on a Mathematical Approach. Mathematics, 9(9), 1052. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9091052

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop