A Comprehensive Decision Framework for Selecting Distribution Center Locations: A Hybrid Improved Fuzzy SWARA and Fuzzy CRADIS Approach

Task

Answer

For the title, you say developing a DSS. However, the paper is just using some MCDM methods for selecting distribution centre locations, not developing a DSS. As a result, the title should be changed.

Acknowledged. The title is changed as per your suggestion to “A Comprehensive Decision Framework for Selecting Distribu-tion Center Locations: A Hybrid Improved Fuzzy SWARA and Fuzzy CRADIS Approach”.

The last sentence of the introduction section should be reorganized. You should provide the outline of the rest of the paper, not detailing sections 4-6.

True, thank you. The last pararhaph of the Introduction section is changed.

For the literature review, I suggest the authors add more related studies about decision making

under uncertainty, for instance, Application of group decision making in shipping industry 4.0:

Bibliometric analysis, trends, and future directions; Consensus reaching for group decision making with multi-granular unbalanced linguistic information: A bounded confidence and minimum adjustment-based approach. Moreover, Fig. 1 is confused for me. What are the meanings for the lines?

Acknowledged. We have introduced a few GDM related studies to the Literature review section, references no.: 3, 29,30,31,32, and 33. Additionaly, we have removed Figure 1, as in a small place, in any setting visibility would be low.

The notations of Eqs. 9-12 is incorrect, it should be d_ij^+ and d_ij^-. For Eq. 13, the meanings

of d_i^l d_i^m is unclear. How to determine s_0^_ and s_0^-?

Acknowledged. We have made nessesary changes (marked in the manuscipt).

Please discuss more about your future studies, for instance, it is interesting to consider the consensus reaching process in selecting distribution centre locations. Please comment this point by referring to Threshold-based value-driven method to support consensus reaching in multicriteria group sorting problems: A minimum adjustment perspective; Consensus-based TOPSIS-Sort-B for multi-criteria sorting in the context of group decision-making.

Acknowledged. We have made nessesary changes (marked in the manuscipt).

The language should also be improved to avoid any typos and grammar mistakes.

Acknowledged. We believe that we have made the nessesary changes through proofreading; hoping that all the style, grammar and spelling mistakes are now corrected.

Task

Answer

Please revise your title to improve the clarity of your main research aim. The current title fails to present the core idea of your proposal. It contains too many abbreviations.

Acknowledged. The title is changed as per suggestions to “A Comprehensive Decision Framework for Selecting Distribution Center Locations: A Hybrid Improved Fuzzy SWARA and Fuzzy CRADIS Approach”.

The abstract section should be rewritten. It is not well organized. Please follow strictly the structure of the abstract section and shorten it to 250 words. A good abstract should contain only 6 short sentences as follows: 1) The scientific domain and the problem within the domain which is the subject matter of the paper, 2) The research question to be answered in the paper, 3) The means and methods (scientific tools) used to obtain the answer to the stated research question, 4) The answer to the research question, 5) The meaning and importance of the answer and the results obtained, 6) The future research directions based on the results of the completed research reported in this paper.

 Acknowledged. The abstract is rewritten. Even though it consists of 8 sentences, the abstract consists of 206 words, following the instruction.

Keywords are the labels of your manuscript used in scientific databases containing many thousands of papers. A correct use of keywords will determine if your article is noticed by potential readers, or if it is only glanced over before the reader decides to move on the next article in the database without reading yours. Keywords that are generic in nature are always ineffective. The last keyword could be removed.

Acknowledged. The keywords are changed.

The introduction section should be improved. This section should set the stage for what is presented in the article. One must provide a clear description of the problem to be addressed along with a detailed explanation of the importance of the problem. One should also define the group of stakeholders – the larger the better – for whom the stated problem is important. This is followed by the definition and detailed description of the specific research question to be addressed. A detailed justification of the importance of the question stated is also essential, along with a description of other related questions which are not being addressed in your paper. A clear definition of the future beneficiaries of the answer to be obtained must also be provided.

Acknowledged and presented through paragraphs:

“As the Brčko District government recognizes the community's strategic location and has invested in the development of business zones to capitalize on its potential, this study evaluates these business zones to identify the best zone for companies looking to establish distribution centers in the area. The primary goal of this research is to provide a thorough evaluation of these locations to assist companies in making informed decisions about the establishment of distribution centers. Thus, to accomplish this, the study employs multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods to evaluate potential locations in BiH's Brčko District.”

“An expert assessment based on linguistic values will be used to select the location for the distribution center. To achieve this, the paper will employ the fuzzy set based IMF SWA-RA (IMproved Fuzzy Stepwise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) and fuzzy CRADIS (Compromise Ranking of Alternatives from Distance to the Ideal Solution) methods. The IMF SWARA method will calculate the weights of the criteria, and the fuzzy CRADIS method will be used to rank the alternatives.”
“This paper is designed to address several key research gaps, including (1) evaluating potential distribution center locations in BiH's Brčko District, and (2) proposing a hybrid methodology that employs a fuzzy set approach to facilitate the selection of these distribution centers’ locations. Finally, by providing a comprehensive evaluation of potential locations within the Brčko District, this research aims to provide (3) guidance to potential investors interested in establishing distribution centers.”

Please try not to cite too many references in one sentence. For instance, "To address the question of location selection in different scenarios, the AHP in its basic variant, along with Fuzzy AHP and a Spherical Fuzzy (SF) AHP as part of the selection process was utilized by Sopha et al. [3], Wichapa and Khokhajaikiat [14], Bar- zehkar et al. [15], Hartati and Islamiati [16], Mihajlović et al. [8], Ocampo et al. [17], Agrebi and Abed [18], Ak and Acar [19], Kieu et al. [20], Suman et al. [21], and Göncü and Ç etin [22]. The use of ANP and Fuzzy ANP was identified in papers by Ö zceylan et al. [23], Ocampo et al. [17], Okatan et al. [6], and Nong [24]. TOPSIS, Fuzzy TOPSIS and Single-Valued Complex Neutrosophic Set (SVCNS) variant of TOPSIS were used by Awasthi et al. [25], Ö zceylan et al. [23], Sopha et al. [3], Wichapa and Khokhajaikiat [14], Agrebi and Abed [18], Ehsanifar et al. [26], Quynh et al. [27], Ak and Acar [19] and Nong [24]."

Acknowledged.

The paragraph now reads: “To address location selection questions in different scenarios, several studies utilized the AHP in its basic variant, along with Fuzzy AHP and a Spherical Fuzzy (SF) AHP as part of the selection process [4, 15-23]. Additionally, ANP and Fuzzy ANP were identified as useful methods [7, 18, 24-25], as well as TOPSIS, Fuzzy TOPSIS, and the Single-Valued Complex Neutrosophic Set (SVCNS) variant of TOPSIS [4, 15, 19-20, 24-28].”

The paper should improve the literature review section. The review on existing decision-making methods should be enhanced with more recent high-quality research. There are many existing publications in this research area. It is not clear the authors collected these papers based on which criteria. I would suggest the authors include more recent work on integrated fuzzy set-based decision analysis approaches in Section 4.1, such as: Fostering linguistic decision-making under uncertainty: A proportional interval type-2 hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS approach based on Hamacher aggregation operators and andness optimization models; Expertise-Structure and Risk-Appetite-Integrated Two-Tiered Collective Opinion Generation Framework for Large-Scale Group Decision Making; etc.

Acknowledged. We have introduced a few GDM related studies to the Literature review section, references no.: 3, 29,30,31,32, and 33. Additionally, we have removed Figure 1, as in a small place, in any setting, visibility would be low.

Regarding the research results: Provide a clear, detailed description of your results obtained by you with the use of the research methodology described in item 6 above. Concentrate on the main points and avoid digressing to only loosely related or unrelated topics. Your description should be aided by well-formatted and fully readable tables and figures emphasizing the main points being made. Avoid the inclusion of lettering and labels in a language other than English, as these will be useless for an audience unable to read in that language.

Acknowledged. Through changes in the section, we believe we made necessary modifications.

The level of English in this manuscript does not meet the journal's desired standard. Therefore, language should be improved.

Acknowledged. We believe that we have made the necessary changes through proofreading; hoping that all the style, grammar and spelling mistakes are now corrected.

Task

Answer

fig. 1 is irreadable

Acknowledged. We have removed Figure 1, as in a small place, in any setting, visibility would be low.

in formula 2, what stands for kj-?

in formula 3 insert k in lieu of j

benefit criteria and cost criteria are indicated at left of 4 and 5 with the same symbol

formulas 6, 7, 8 need clarifications for the usage of symbols never defined

Acknowledged. The changes are made and could be seen in lines from 231 to 239.

formulas 9 and 10 must be indexed otherwise the formulas 11 and 12 are not clear

Acknowledged. The changes are made and could be seen in lines from 243 onward.

in formula 13 the symbols are never defined

Acknowledged. The changes are made and could be seen in lines from 262 onward. In general, indexes and symbols are now defined and clarified throughout the Methodology and Methods section.