Evaluation of optimal route selection for public transport network routes on urban roads using Fuzzy‐TOPSIS method

In developing countries such as India, Bengaluru city has experienced extraordinary growth in vehicle traffic on arterial roads, causing intersections to operate over capacity under mixed traffic conditions. The speed on urban streets in central business district areas is lower than 15 kmph during peak hours. One of the main routes connecting the airport to the central business district is also vulnerable to this problem. Therefore, providing an alternative route to divert traffic from the mainstream is critical. This study's main goal is to identify alternate routes from Majestic to the airport using remote sensing and a geographic information system, and then evaluate those alternates using the Fuzzy‐TOPSIS approach. This study has used the GIS Arc software application to select the alternative while taking numerous factors such as time, speed, distance, environmental impact, and economic feasibility into consideration. The video graphic and moving car observer methods have been used for the extraction of data for the inventory of the existing route, while the geo image processing tool has been used to analyze alternative routes in the Bengaluru metropolitan area (BMA). The analysis has shown that the alternative route has a lesser travel time of 2 h 30 min in public transit and 1 h 30 min in private mode. The future scope of the study is to compare the alternative and the most suitable routes to divert traffic. Another public transport route network could be developed to minimize the external incoming vehicles in BMA, particularly to reach the airport on urban roads under heterogeneous traffic conditions.

and individual vehicles.Traffic on the ORR and its linked highways has enhanced as a result of the rapid ribbon growth along and even beyond the ORR.Due to this, traffic has become congested at all significant intersections and in the middle of blocks on metropolitan roadways.The relocation of the international airport from Hindustan Aeronautics Limited to Devanahalli has altered the travel experience.At the moment, agencies such as BDA and BBMP are putting in grade separators along the ORR and at key intersections throughout the city.However, this has not alleviated traffic congestion between intersections.In this scenario, the main route connecting the heart of Bengaluru, that is, Majestic, to Devanahalli Airport has more than one V/C ratio, and most of the junctions along this route are gridlocked.Widening the existing route is only a palliative, and it is difficult to do because Bengaluru is already a built-up section.As a result, finding an alternative path to divert a portion of traffic to a new route is a critical solution.
Bengaluru faces significant limitations in expanding its road infrastructure, necessitating the optimization of existing roads to ensure smoother traffic flow.To address capacity issues and enhance the overall efficiency of the road network, the implementation of traffic management applications proves to be the most relevant and widely accepted strategy.To assess the feasibility and viability of potential new routes, a specialized program called RS and GIS will be employed.Leveraging GIS technology enables a comprehensive understanding of rights-of-way, streamlining processes like property acquisition for new alignments and the disposal of unnecessary properties.By integrating parcel, survey, and assessor information, GIS empowers rights-of-way managers to make informed decisions about which properties may no longer be necessary.Utilizing GIS technology, it becomes possible to map the precise locations of different utilities situated within rights-of-way, thereby streamlining future construction and relocation endeavours and mitigating the risk of unforeseen accidents during construction.To enhance property management efficiency, a GIS system can be integrated with a database-driven lease management solution to handle rights-of-way leases more effectively. 1

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
The primary objectives of the study as are follows: 1. Determining alternative routes from Majestic to Kempegowda International Airport (KIA) under mixed traffic conditions.2. Evaluating the alternative routes of different parameters Fuzzy-TOPSIS method for analysis of this study segments on urban roads under mixed traffic conditions.3. Evaluating the alternative routes and to suggest the best alternative feasible route as per the fuzzy TOPSIS method for BMA.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The methodology and data collection process used in this study is betokenes in Figure 1.The GIS tool was used to analyze and compare alternative routes based on variables such as route length, building buffer area, and tree area.Additionally, speed and delay studies were conducted on all selected routes using various modes of transportation to determine total travel time, including all types of delay and impact of side friction on roads, 2 this variable was also included in the evaluation using the fuzzy TOPSIS technique and the results are validated with another MCDM method EADS. 3,4

Inventory on existing routes
The video graphic method is being used to conduct traffic surveys at junctions to calculate congestion rates and determine traffic composition in terms of public transit, private vehicles, and personal mode vehicles such as cars and bikes.
For speed and delay studies, the moving car observer method is being used to calculate travel time.The results are presented in Table 1, and the composition index is shown in Figure 2 for all the junctions.Table 1 represents peak hourly traffic variation at all junctions (Source: Bangalore Development Authority [BDA]) and Figure 2 shows hourly traffic variation at all junctions.According to     volumes among all the routes leading to the junction, with an average of 19,157 PCUs (passenger car units) for Hebbal road and 10,588 PCUs for R.T. Nagar road.Notably, Hebbal road serves as a significant arterial thoroughfare linking the city to the KIA and is a crucial commuting pathway for residents residing in the northern part of Bangalore.The substantial traffic congestion observed on Hebbal road during the morning rush hour may be attributed to the considerable number of commuters heading to work or making their way to the airport.Moreover, the Hebbal junction serves as a major intersection connecting several vital roads, which inevitably contributes to the elevated traffic volumes experienced in the area.R.T. Nagar road is another major arterial road in Bangalore that connects several residential areas to the city center.It is also a key commuting route for residents in the northern part of Bangalore.The high traffic volumes on this road during the morning rush hour may be due to the large number of commuters travelling to work or dropping their children off at school in the city center. 5The obtained data has a greater relevance with agencies and secondary source data. 5

Analysis of traffic composition
Based on the survey data and the outcomes presented in Table 1 and Figure 2, it has been determined that most of the junctions are congested due to the large number of personal vehicles compared to public transportation modes.This has resulted in roads operating at more than one V/C ratio, indicating a need for route replanning.However, widening the existing route may not be a feasible solution, as it can lead to additional environmental and social impacts. 6Therefore, alternative routes need to be identified and analyzed using RS and GIS. 7RS and GIS can be used to collect and analyze data on traffic patterns, 8 road conditions, road width, building area, and other relevant factors to identify potential alternative routes.

Data collection of satellite images
The data collecting satellite images through the BHUVAN portal by sign-up.Indian Earth Observation Visualization Portal BHUVAN (http://www.bhuvan.nrsc.gov.in) and shown in Table 2.

Analyzing the satellite images in Arc GIS
The satellite images are downloaded from the Indian Earth Observation Visualization Portal BHUVAN (http://www .bhuvan.nrsc.gov.in) and directly add the base in the ARC GIS and analyses the satellite images by using an ARC map by composing the image into false-color image and selection of routes as shown in the Figure 3.To create a base map of Bengaluru with alternative routes, several layers need to be prepared using the GIS database.These layers include point data, line data, and area data, which are then organized into categories such as roads, buildings, and trees using ArcCatalog.
Once the required layers have been created, 9 it can be added to ArcMap for editing or to carry out the project.In this case, the aim is to select the best alternative routes to reach a particular destination in Bengaluru.The selection of the routes will depend on several factors such as distance, number of users, built-up area, serviceability, viability, and economy.To select the best routes, three routes can be chosen using ArcGIS by adopting the above parameters. 10The first step would be to analyze the data and identify the possible routes that meet the requirements.Followed by the parameters can be used to compare the routes and evaluate them based on their suitability.For an instance, the distance between the starting point and the destination can be measured using ArcGIS, 11 and the route with the shortest distance can be selected.
The number of users can also be estimated using population data, and the route with the lowest number of users can be chosen to avoid congestion.Similarly, the built-up area and serviceability of the routes can be analyzed to determine their suitability.Once the three routes have been selected, the required surveys must be carried out in all the three routes and as a side friction improper bus stops have considered. 12Routes can be evaluated based on their viability and economy using fuzzy TOPSIS.

F I G U R E 4
Alternative route 1.

Alternative route I
The alternative route number I is in a black color line that starts from the Sangollirayanna circle and ends at the airport via CBI, Nagavara circle as shown in Figure 4.The total distance of this route is 36.35km, and the road condition is good.The road buffer area for this route is 726,961 sq., and it has 7050 trees and other details are shown in Table 3.The alternative route has fewer gridlock points compared to the existing stretch that connects the endpoint.However, an end-to-end connectivity is not witnessed yet, but it already has local BMTC public transit connectivity.In terms of land acquisition, there are 139 buildings with an area of 50513.810538m 2 that need to be acquired for the construction of this alternate route, it is significant to remember that the economic benefits of this alternate route should be carefully evaluated against its environmental impact and the potential displacement of people and businesses due to the land acquisition.

Alternative route II
The alignment that starts at Sangollirayanna circle and ends at KIA via Yeshwanthpur and Jalahalli cross is a 49.049 km stretch that covers several nearby villages, and the travel time details are shown in Table 4.The primitive intention of this alignment is to provide an easy link to the airport for people coming from other districts such as Haasan, Tumkur, Shivamogga, and Mangalore, and reduce traffic congestion in the CBD.This route does provide some difficulties, though.
The biggest drawback of this alignment is that it goes through multiple towns where agriculture is the main mode of land use.As a result, there are several environmental problems that must be solved.For instance, it will take the removal of some 50,000 trees to make room for the alignment.This might significantly affect the biodiversity and local ecology.This alignment's passage through village roads, which were not built to handle heavy traffic, is another problem.The roads may see increased wear and tear as a result, which could increase their susceptibility to damage and raise the expense of upkeep.Additionally, a buffer area with about 128 structures is traversed by the alignment.The alignment work is probably going to have an impact on these structures, which have a total area of 61542.539m 2 .People and businesses may be forced to relocate as a result, resulting in serious social and economic disturbances.Despite these difficulties, offering public transport over this route may be able to ease or divert traffic along the current route.This can contribute to making the region's overall transport system more effective and long-term sustainable.

Comparison between alternative routes
The 32 km alternative route 1 runs from the east side of Bengaluru to the airport.The route's roads are in decent condition, but they are already operating at more than one v/c ratio, which means that the volume of traffic is more than the road's capacity.Congestion and extended travel times follow.However, by offering grade-separated modes or designated lanes for public transport, this route has the potential to shorten travel times.Alternative route 2 is a 44 km long route with poor road conditions and no infrastructure.However, this route has the ability to draw drivers from other neighbourhoods and vehicles engaged in external travel to the airport without affecting city traffic.There is a significant chance that travel time might be cut in half by building improved roads along this route.The current route from Bengaluru KBS to the international airport is congested, well-connected, and simple to follow.However, traffic can be heavy during peak hours.The complete comparison, which involves seven parameters, is depicted in the Table 5.

Evaluation of alternative routes using Fuzzy-TOPSIS method
The utilization of a decision-making method known as fuzzy TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Situation) allows for the prioritization of alternatives by assessing their resemblance to an ideal solution while considering their distance from undesirable outcomes. 13This approach builds upon the conventional TOPSIS technique by incorporating fuzzy sets to effectively handle ambiguity and uncertainty during the decision-making process. 14This is especially helpful when the available data is imprecise or when the judgments of experts are subjective. 15Numerous criteria and options can be handled by Fuzzy-TOPSIS 16 this method does not require absolute values or weightings for the criterion because it employs a relative comparison approach.Instead, it contrasts possibilities with one another, making it more flexible to situations in the actual world.It is easy to interpret the results, Fuzzy-TOPSIS is flexible and adaptable to various types of criteria, whether they are quantitative or qualitative.The fuzzy TOPSIS method's drawbacks are subjectivity 17 might lead to different outcomes for the same problem when assessed by different individuals and Fuzzy-TOPSIS, like other MCDM method, relies heavily on the quality of data input. 18If the data used for the analysis is inaccurate or incomplete, it can lead to unreliable results.Despite its limitations, fuzzy TOPSIS stands out compared to other MCDCM (multi-criteria decision-making) methods due to its exceptional capacity to manage decision-making ambiguity, 19 something that other methods struggle to achieve.Moreover, fuzzy TOPSIS exhibits remarkable flexibility and adaptability when dealing with different types of criteria, whether they are quantitative or qualitative. 20As a result, it proves to be highly suitable for addressing a diverse array of decision-making problems, therefore, for the selected variables, the fuzzy TOPSIS method would be the most suitable approach for analysis. 21Identify the criteria for evaluating the alternatives: in this stage, the focus is on recognizing the factors that are pertinent to the decision problem and expressing those using fuzzy sets.Each of these criteria must be accompanied by a corresponding membership function, which outlines the extent to which an alternative aligns with that specific criterion that specifies the degree of membership of an alternative to that criterion.2. The next step is to evaluate each criterion's relative importance in the decision-making process.This is accomplished by assigning each criterion a weight that corresponds to its significance in the current job, and then normalizing 22 those weights to make sure their sum is equal to 1.The analytic hierarchical process (AHP) is used to assign weights to the parameters.23 The weights calculated as per the AHP method which begins with the assignment of priorities on a scale from 0 to 9.These priorities are provided by the road users who are commuting in the selected stretch, and the mean values are used as the priority scores, the weights calculated as per the AHP method is follows length-33.44%(0.3344), travel time-26.11%(0.2611), road width-22.92%(0.2291), no of buildings to be demolished-3.96%(0.0396), buffer area-3.99%(0.0396), trees to be cut-4.79%(0.0479), side friction-4.79%(0.0479).3. Create the fuzzy decision matrix: a decision matrix is generated at this stage to show how each alternative performs in relation to each criterion.The related membership functions are used to calculate the degree of each alternative's membership to a specific criterion.4. Determine the optimal solutions, both positive and negative: the best possible performance for all criteria is represented by the positive ideal solution, whereas the poorest possible performance for all criteria is represented by the negative ideal solution.These solutions are calculated based on the weights and membership functions of each criterion.5. Calculate the similarity and distance measures: in this stage, the similarity measure which indicates how much each alternative resembles the positive ideal solution and the distance measure which indicates how much each alternative differs from the negative ideal solution are calculated. 6.Rank the alternatives: the final step involves ranking the alternatives based on their similarity and distance measures.
The alternatives with the highest similarity measures and lowest distance measures are ranked the highest.
Step 1: Create a decision matrix.The fuzzy TOPSIS approach is used in this study to rank seven criteria and three alternatives.Each criterion's type and weight are displayed in the Table 6.
The decision matrix is used to evaluate and compare different options based on various criteria.In this particular case, the alternatives have been evaluated based on multiple criteria, and the results of the evaluation have been presented in the  matrix.The matrix contains information on how each alternative performs on each criterion.Typically, the performance of each alternative is scored on a scale of 1 to 10 or some other scale, depending on the criteria being used.
In this instance, it should be highlighted that the matrix here represents the arithmetic mean of all experts who participated in the evaluation.This implies that each expert would assess the options using the same criteria and scale, and their scores would be averaged to obtain the final scores presented in Table 7.This method assists in minimizing bias and ensuring the evaluation is as impartial as feasible.
A normalized decision matrix is calculated by Equations ( 1) and ( 2) and obtained values presented in Table 8.
The weight of each criterion in the normalized fuzzy decision matrix is multiplied taking into account the various weights of each criterion to create the weighted normalized decision matrix using Equation (3).
where wij represents weight of criterion c j.By combining the best and worst performances across all of the criteria, the relevance weights of the criterion are taken into account to determine the ideal and anti-ideal solutions.After that, the closeness coefficients are calculated to determine how similar each option is to the ideal and non-ideal outcomes.Decision-makers can then rank the options based on these closeness coefficients to determine the best choice.
where ṽ * i the max value of I for all the alternatives is, ṽ− 1 is the min value of i for all the alternatives.B and C represent the positive and negative ideal solutions and the results are outlined in Table 9.
The distance between each alternative and FPIS and the distance between each alternative and FNIS are respectively calculated using Equations ( 6) and (7).
d is the distance between two fuzzy numbers, when given two triangular fuzzy numbers (a 1 , b 1 , c 1 ) and (a 2 , b 2 , c 2 ), e distance between the two can be calculated using Equation ( 8) and the outcomes are delineated in Table 10.The best alternative is closest to the FPIS and farthest to the FNIS.The closeness coefficient of each alternative and the ranking order of it are shown in the Table 11.
According to the results, alternative Ar1 is the most desirable option, followed by Ar2 and then Ar3 and the results are validated with another method called evaluation based on distance from average solution the most efficient method in MCDCM 13,24 and the obtained results are compatible with fuzzy TOPSIS results.To assess the robustness of the findings, sensitivity analysis was performed by altering the weightage of parameters and reducing the variables.These variations did not reveal any significant discrepancies in the selected best route, indicating the stability and reliability of the fuzzy TOPSIS approach.This outcome underscores the consistency of the chosen route under different scenarios and reinforces the validity of the research methodology employed in this study.

CONCLUSIONS
This study addressed the pressing issue of traffic congestion on the main route connecting Majestic to the airport in Bengaluru, India.By utilizing RS and GIS techniques and employing the Fuzzy-TOPSIS method for evaluation, the study aimed to identify alternative routes that could effectively divert traffic and alleviate congestion.
The GIS Arc software application played a crucial role in selecting potential alternative routes, taking into consideration various factors such as time, speed, distance, environmental impact, and economic feasibility.Data collection for the existing route inventory involved video graphic and moving car observer methods, while the GIP tool facilitated the analysis of alternative routes in the BMA.
The analysis revealed that one particular alternative route, referred to as AR1, showed promising results.AR1 demonstrated significantly reduced travel times, estimated at 2 h and 30 min for public transit and 1 h and 30 min for private modes.These findings suggest that AR1 has the potential to mitigate congestion and enhance commuting experiences for travelers heading to the airport.
It is crucial to remember that the main goal of this study was to identify alternate routes and assess their potential for effectiveness.The next steps involve conducting a comparison analysis among the chosen alternatives to determine the best path for successfully redirecting traffic.The analysis also suggests looking into the creation of a dedicated public transportation route network to reduce the number of incoming outside vehicles in the BMA, particularly for airport access under Heterogeneous traffic conditions.
This study offers useful information for Bengaluru's traffic planners and policymakers by utilizing RS and GIS methodologies and the Fuzzy-TOPSIS method, India.The findings underscore the importance of considering alternative routes to mitigate congestion and enhance travel experiences for residents and visitors.Future research could focus on implementing and monitoring the effectiveness of the recommended alternative route and further expanding the public transport network to address traffic challenges in the BMA.

1
Flowchart of the methodology adopted in the study.TA B L E 1Peak hourly traffic variation at all junction (Source: BDA).

F I G U R E 2
Traffic composition at various junctions.

From To Road length (meters) Road width Time required to travel
Details of AR1 geometrical, intersection, and travel time.Sl.No.
Details of alternative route 2 geometric and intersection.
TA B L E 4 Comparison between selected alternatives.
TA B L E 5 Characteristics of criteria.Various alternatives at their normalized values.
TA B L E 6 Positive and negative ideal solutions.Distance of each alternative from the positive and negative ideal solutions using the Euclidean distance formula.
) The closeness coefficient of each alternative is calculated by Equation(9).
j) are crisp numbers.