Enhancing User Experience in Smart Tourism via Fuzzy Logic-Based Personalization
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Related Work
2.1. Literature Review
2.1.1. Smart Tourism, Personalization, and Recommender Systems
2.1.2. Fuzzy Logic in User-Centric Systems
2.2. Fuzzy TOPSIS
- Step 1: Identify alternatives and criteria.
- Step 2: Construct a Fuzzy Decision Matrix, which represents criteria evaluations using fuzzy numbers for each alternative.
- Step 3: Normalize the Fuzzy Decision Matrix.
- Step 4: Construct the Weighted Normalized Fuzzy Decision Matrix by applying weights to criteria based on their importance.
- Step 5: Calculate the Fuzzy Positive Ideal Solution (FPIS) and the Fuzzy Negative Ideal Solution (FNIS).
- Step 6: Compute the distances of each alternative from the FPIS and FNIS.
- Step 7: Compute the closeness coefficient for each alternative to determine the ranking.
- Step 8: Rank the alternatives and select the alternative with the highest closeness coefficient, which represents the best alternative.
3. System Design
3.1. Data
3.2. The Fuzzy Logic-Based Mechanism for Personalized Recommendations
3.2.1. Fuzzy Sets for Criteria
3.2.2. Linguistic Terms for Criteria Ratings and Weights
3.3. Fuzzy TOPSIS-Based Mechanism
4. Use Cases
- for Anna: Spain, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Cyprus
- for Peter: Switzerland, Spain, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Cyprus
- for Bill: Cyprus, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Sweden
- for Alice: Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Cyprus
- for Kate: Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden, Spain, Cyprus
- for George: Italy, Switzerland, Bulgaria, France
- for Mary: Switzerland, Italy, France, Bulgaria
4.1. Results Visualization for Anna
4.1.1. Anna’s Preferences and Input
- Denmark
- Sweden
- Cyprus
- Spain
- Switzerland
- Germany
- Cost of Living: Very High (indicating that this is a critical factor for Anna)
- Quality of Life: Medium
- Adventure: High (indicating her interest in adventurous activities)
- Heritage: None (indicating no importance to cultural heritage)
- Travel Cost (EUR): Very High (indicating sensitivity to high travel costs)
- Travel Time: None (indicating no restrictions regarding travel duration)
- Safety: High (indicating her concern for safety)
4.1.2. Processing Anna’s Preferences
4.1.3. Recommended Destinations for Anna
- Spain (highest alignment with Anna’s preferences)
- Switzerland
- Sweden
- Denmark
- Germany
- Cyprus
4.1.4. Figures Supporting Anna’s Results
4.2. Real-World Integration and Business Adoption
5. Evaluation
6. Discussion
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
TOPSIS | Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution |
LLMs | Large Language Models |
ITMS | Tourism Management System |
FCA | Fuzzy Cluster Analysis |
FPIS | Fuzzy Positive Ideal Solution |
FNIS | Fuzzy Negative Ideal Solution |
Appendix A
Appendix B
Country | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Denmark | (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Austria | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) |
Ireland | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
France | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) & (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Finland | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
The Netherlands | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Luxembourg | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 1, 3) & (1, 3, 5) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Germany | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
United Kingdom | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Belgium | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Sweden | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Italy | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) |
Cyprus | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Estonia | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) & (1, 3, 5) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Slovenia | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Latvia | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Spain | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Lithuania | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Slovakia | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) & (1, 3, 5) | (1, 1, 3) & (1, 3, 5) | (1, 1, 3) & (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Croatia | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Portugal | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) & (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) & (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) & (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Hungary | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Poland | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) & (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Bulgaria | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Romania | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) |
Switzerland | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) & (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) & (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) |
Country | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Denmark | (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Austria | (3, 6, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) |
Ireland | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
France | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 8.5, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Finland | (3, 6, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
The Netherlands | (3, 6, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Luxembourg | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 2, 5) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 6, 10) |
Germany | (3, 6, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (5, 7, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 6, 10) |
United Kingdom | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (1, 4, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Belgium | (3, 6, 10) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Sweden | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) |
Italy | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 4, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) |
Cyprus | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 6, 10) |
Estonia | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 4, 5) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (5, 7, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Slovenia | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Latvia | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 6, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 6, 10) |
Spain | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) | (3, 6, 10) |
Lithuania | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (1, 1, 3) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (3, 6, 10) |
Slovakia | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 2, 5) | (1, 2, 5) | (1, 2, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 6, 10) |
Croatia | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 7, 10) |
Portugal | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 8.5, 10) | (5, 8.5, 10) | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 8.5, 10) | (3, 6, 10) |
Hungary | (1, 4, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 6, 10) |
Poland | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (1, 4, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 6, 10) |
Bulgaria | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 6, 10) |
Romania | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (1, 3, 5) | (3, 6, 10) |
Switzerland | (7, 10, 10) | (5, 8.5, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 6, 10) | (3, 5, 7) | (3, 5, 7) | (5, 7, 10) |
Country | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Denmark | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Austria | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Ireland | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
France | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (3, 5, 7) | (0.5, 0.85, 1) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
Finland | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
The Netherlands | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Luxembourg | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.2, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Germany | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
United Kingdom | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) | (0.1, 0.4, 0.7) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
Belgium | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.1, 0.4, 0.7) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
Sweden | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
Italy | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.4, 0.7) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) |
Cyprus | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Estonia | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.4, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Slovenia | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Latvia | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.17, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Spain | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.7, 1, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.14, 0.2) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Lithuania | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.3) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Slovakia | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.2, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.2, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.2, 0.5) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Croatia | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
Portugal | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.5, 0.85, 1) | (0.5, 0.85, 1) | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.1, 0.12, 0.2) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Hungary | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Poland | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.3, 0.5, 0.7) | (0.14, 0.25, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Bulgaria | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Romania | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.1, 0.3, 0.5) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.2, 0.33, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) |
Switzerland | (0.1, 0.1, 0.14) | (0.5, 0.85, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) | (0.3, 0.6, 1) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.14, 0.2, 0.33) | (0.5, 0.7, 1) |
References
- Bakhtiyorovna, N.z.Z. Three-Level Smart Model of Tourist Destination; Gwalior Management Academy: Gwalior, India, 1998; p. 78. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, D.; Li, X.; Li, Y. China’s “smart tourism destination” initiative: A taste of the service-dominant logic. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2013, 2, 59–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buhalis, D.; Amaranggana, A. Smart tourism destinations. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2014; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 553–564. [Google Scholar]
- Mehraliyev, F.; Chan, I.C.C.; Choi, Y.; Koseoglu, M.A.; Law, R. A state-of-the-art review of smart tourism research. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2020, 37, 78–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gretzel, U. From smart destinations to smart tourism regions. Investig. Reg.-J. Reg. Res. 2018, 42, 171–184. [Google Scholar]
- Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy sets. Information and control, vol. 8 (1965), pp. 338–353.—L. A. Zadeh. Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings. Information sciences, vol. 3 (1971), pp. 177–200. J. Symb. Log. 1973, 38, 656–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chrysafiadi, K. The Role of Fuzzy Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Smart Applications. In Fuzzy Logic-Based Software Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 25–29. [Google Scholar]
- Chrysafiadi, K. Fuzzy Logic-Based Software Systems. In Fuzzy Logic-Based Software Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 31–129. [Google Scholar]
- Koohathongsumrit, N.; Meethom, W. A fuzzy decision-making framework for route selection in multimodal transportation networks. Eng. Manag. J. 2022, 34, 689–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, V.; Komal; Dincer, H. A review on TOPSIS method and its extensions for different applications with recent development. Soft Comput. 2023, 27, 18011–18039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nădăban, S.; Dzitac, S.; Dzitac, I. Fuzzy TOPSIS: A general view. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2016, 91, 823–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palczewski, K.; Sałabun, W. The fuzzy TOPSIS applications in the last decade. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2019, 159, 2294–2303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, X.; Tan, W.; Sun, Y.; Huang, T.; Yang, C. Multi-objective optimization and decision making for integrated energy system using STA and fuzzy TOPSIS. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024, 240, 122539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masseno, M.D.; Santos, C. Privacy and Data Protection Issues on Smart Tourism Destinations—A First Approach. In Proceedings of the Intelligent Environments 2018—Workshop Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, Rome, Italy, 25–28 June 2018; pp. 298–307. [CrossRef]
- Gavalas, D.; Konstantopoulos, C.; Mastakas, K.; Pantziou, G. Mobile recommender systems in tourism. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2014, 39, 319–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nitti, M.; Pilloni, V.; Giusto, D.D.; Popescu, V. IoT Architecture for a Sustainable Tourism Application in a Smart City Environment. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2017, 2017, 9201640:1–9201640:9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontogianni, A.; Alepis, E.; Virvou, M.; Patsakis, C. Smart Tourism—The Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Kontogianni, A.; Alepis, E.; Patsakis, C. Promoting smart tourism personalised services via a combination of deep learning techniques. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 187, 115964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filieri, R.; D’Amico, E.; Destefanis, A.; Paolucci, E.; Raguseo, E. Artificial intelligence (AI) for tourism: An European-based study on successful AI tourism start-ups. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 33, 4099–4125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pillai, R.; Sivathanu, B. Adoption of AI-based chatbots for hospitality and tourism. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 32, 3199–3226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, K.; Zheng, L.; Wu, D.; Zou, Y. Leveraging large language models for daily tourist demand forecasting. Curr. Issues Tour. 2024, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sigala, M.; Ooi, K.B.; Tan, G.W.H.; Aw, E.C.X.; Buhalis, D.; Cham, T.H.; Chen, M.M.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Gretzel, U.; Inversini, A.; et al. Understanding the impact of ChatGPT on tourism and hospitality: Trends, prospects and research agenda. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2024, 60, 384–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kontogianni, A.; Alepis, E.; Virvou, M.; Patsakis, C. Conceptualizing Smart Tourism. In Smart Tourism—The Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 7–31. [Google Scholar]
- Braunhofer, M.; Ricci, F. Selective contextual information acquisition in travel recommender systems. Inf. Technol. Tour. 2017, 17, 5–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García, L.M.; Aciar, S.; Mendoza, R.; Puello, J.J. Smart Tourism Platform Based on Microservice Architecture and Recommender Services. In Proceedings of the Mobile Web and Intelligent Information Systems—15th International Conference, MobiWIS 2018, Barcelona, Spain, 6–8 August 2018; pp. 167–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ricci, F.; Rokach, L.; Shapira, B. Recommender Systems: Introduction and Challenges. In Recommender Systems Handbook; Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jorro-Aragoneses, J.L.; Agudo, M.B.D.; García, J.A.R. Madrid Live: A Context-Aware Recomendar System of Leisure Plans. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 29th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), Boston, MA, USA, 6–8 November 2017; pp. 796–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bobadilla, J.; Ortega, F.; Hernando, A.; Gutiérrez, A. Recommender systems survey. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2013, 46, 109–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarado-Uribe, J.; Gómez-Oliva, A.; Molina, G.; González-Mendoza, M.; Parra-Meroño, M.C.; Jara, A.J. Towards the Development of a Smart Tourism Application Based on Smart POI and Recommendation Algorithms: Ceutí as a Study Case. In Proceedings of the Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing—Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing (IMIS-2017), Torino, Italy, 10–12 July 2017; pp. 904–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, W.L.; Duan, Y.C.; Huang, M.X.; Dong, L.F.; Zhou, X.Y.; Hu, T. A Research on Smart Tourism Service Mechanism Based on Context Awareness. In Proceedings of the Computer and Information Technology. Trans Tech Publications, Applied Mechanics and Materials, Singapore, 14–16 January 2014; Volume 519, pp. 752–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smirnov, A.; Kashevnik, A.; Ponomarev, A.; Teslya, N.; Shchekotov, M.; Balandin, S.I. Smart Space-Based Tourist Recommendation System. In Proceedings of the Internet of Things, Smart Spaces, and Next Generation Networks and Systems, St. Petersburg, Russia, 27–29 August 2014; Balandin, S., Andreev, S., Koucheryavy, Y., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 40–51. [Google Scholar]
- Khallouki, H.; Abatal, A.; Bahaj, M. An Ontology-based Context awareness for Smart Tourism Recommendation System. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning and Optimization Algorithms: Theory and Applications, LOPAL 2018, Rabat, Morocco, 2–5 May 2018; pp. 43:1–43:5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seputra, Y.E.A. Smart Tourism Using Cryptocurrency Based on Fuzzy Logic. J. Indones. Tour. Policy Stud. 2023, 8, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mei, Z. Design and Implementation of Intelligent Tourism Management System Based on Fuzzy Cluster Analysis. J. Electr. Syst. 2024, 20, 596–602. [Google Scholar]
- Arunachalam, S.; Sangeethapriya, R.; Akilandeswari, J.; Dhiyanesh, B.; Ruckmani, V.; Prakasam, S. Fuzzy Logic In The Digital Travel Era: Enhancing Tourist Experience Through Comprehensive Hotel Reviews And Sentiment Analysis. J. Electr. Syst. 2024, 20, 1875–1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nilashi, M.; Abumalloh, R.A.; Alrizq, M.; Almulihi, A.; Alghamdi, O.; Farooque, M.; Samad, S.; Mohd, S.; Ahmadi, H. A hybrid method to solve data sparsity in travel recommendation agents using fuzzy logic approach. Math. Probl. Eng. 2022, 2022, 7372849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarez, P.A.; Ishizaka, A.; Martínez, L. Multiple-criteria decision-making sorting methods: A survey. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 183, 115368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, R.; Alamoodi, A.H.; Albahri, O.S.; Zaidan, A.; AlSattar, H.A.; Aickelin, U.; Albahri, A.S.; Zaidan, B.; Ismail, A.R.; Malik, R.Q. A decision modeling approach for smart e-tourism data management applications based on spherical fuzzy rough environment. Appl. Soft Comput. 2023, 143, 110297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, C.L. Multiple Attributes Decision Making; Methods and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Mardani, A.; Jusoh, A.; Kazimieras, E.; Kazemilari, M.; Norulkamar, U.; Khalifah, Z. Application of multiple criteria decision making techniques in tourism and hospitality industry: A systematic review. Transform. Bus. Econ. 2016, 15, 1. [Google Scholar]
- Aazagreyir, P.; Appiahene, P.; Appiah, O.; Boateng, S.; Brown-Acquaye, W.L. An integrated fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methods for service selection: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2022, 100, 4672–4697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pal, S.; Varshney, P.; Madan, G.; Jain, P.; Thakurta, A.; Aggarwal, G.; Shenoy, P.; Srivastava, G. Sample-Efficient Personalization: Modeling User Parameters as Low Rank Plus Sparse Components. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, Valencia, Spain, 2–4 May 2024; pp. 1702–1710. [Google Scholar]
- Afsordegan, A.; Sánchez, M.; Agell, N.; Zahedi, S.; Cremades, L. Decision making under uncertainty using a qualitative TOPSIS method for selecting sustainable energy alternatives. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 13, 1419–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, I.; Çolak, M.; Terzi, F. A comprehensive review of fuzzy multi criteria decision making methodologies for energy policy making. Energy Strategy Rev. 2019, 24, 207–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.; Pan, W. Review fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making in construction management using a network approach. Appl. Soft Comput. 2021, 102, 107103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masdari, M.; Khezri, H. Service selection using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: A comprehensive review. J. Ambient Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2021, 12, 2803–2834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Country | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time (h) | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Denmark | 72.3 | 2 | 12 | 12 | 380 | 3.42 | 73.7 |
Austria | 65.1 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 135 | 2.17 | 70.7 |
Ireland | 64.4 | 10 | 6 | 6 | 292.5 | 6.67 | 53.5 |
France | 63.7 | 12 | 4 | 3 | 255 | 3.58 | 44.7 |
Finland | 63.2 | 3 | 11 | 19 | 522.5 | 3.83 | 73.7 |
The Netherlands | 63.1 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 287.5 | 3.5 | 73.7 |
Luxembourg | 62.4 | 11 | 18 | 21 | 427.5 | 3.08 | 65.6 |
Germany | 62.2 | 6 | 17 | 8 | 337.5 | 3.0 | 61.1 |
United Kingdom | 62.0 | 9 | 15 | 5 | 150 | 3.92 | 52.6 |
Belgium | 61.1 | 7 | 14 | 15 | 190 | 3.42 | 50.8 |
Sweden | 59.3 | 1 | 9 | 16 | 252.5 | 5.5 | 51.6 |
Italy | 56.2 | 15 | 1 | 1 | 132.5 | 2.17 | 52.7 |
Cyprus | 54.7 | 24 | 10 | 18 | 107.5 | 1.58 | 67.6 |
Estonia | 52.0 | 21 | 23 | 24 | 300 | 7.0 | 76.2 |
Slovenia | 49.9 | 23 | 22 | 23 | 257.5 | 6.0 | 75.8 |
Latvia | 49.1 | 26 | 25 | 25 | 297.5 | 6.5 | 62.6 |
Spain | 47.3 | 13 | 2 | 2 | 195 | 3.92 | 63.8 |
Lithuania | 47.1 | 25 | 26 | 26 | 240 | 5.0 | 67.2 |
Slovakia | 46.7 | 22 | 24 | 22 | 147.5 | 2.25 | 68.9 |
Croatia | 45.5 | 17 | 13 | 14 | 225 | 5.92 | 74.0 |
Portugal | 45.1 | 14 | 3 | 4 | 400 | 4.5 | 68.8 |
Hungary | 41.7 | 18 | 20 | 13 | 107.5 | 2.17 | 66.3 |
Poland | 40.8 | 16 | 16 | 11 | 165 | 2.67 | 69.3 |
Bulgaria | 38.3 | 20 | 21 | 20 | 140 | 1.5 | 62.9 |
Romania | 37.5 | 19 | 19 | 17 | 132.5 | 1.5 | 66.3 |
Switzerland | 101.1 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 220 | 2.8 | 73.5 |
Criterion | Linguistic Term | Membership Partition | Function |
---|---|---|---|
Cost-of-Living Index | Very Low (VL) | (0, 0, 20, 30) | |
Low (L) | (20, 30, 40, 50) | ||
Moderate (M) | (40, 50, 60, 70) | ||
High (H) | (60, 70, 85, 100) | ||
Very High (VH) | (85, 100, 120, 120) | ||
Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Very High (VH) | (1, 1, 3, 5) | |
High (H) | (3, 5, 8, 10) | ||
Moderate (M) | (8, 10, 14, 17) | ||
Low (L) | (14, 17, 20, 23) | ||
Very Low (VL) | (20, 23, 26, 26) | ||
Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Very High (VH) | (1, 1, 3, 5) | |
High (H) | (3, 5, 8, 10) | ||
Moderate (M) | (8, 10, 14, 17) | ||
Low (L) | (14, 17, 20, 23) | ||
Very Low (VL) | (20, 23, 26, 26) | ||
Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Very High (VH) | (1, 1, 3, 5) | |
High (H) | (3, 5, 8, 10) | ||
Moderate (M) | (8, 10, 14, 17) | ||
Low (L) | (14, 17, 20, 23) | ||
Very Low (VL) | (20, 23, 26, 26) | ||
Average Travel Cost | Very Low (VL) | (0, 0, 50, 100) | |
Low (L) | (50, 100, 130, 170) | ||
Moderate (M) | (150, 200, 250, 300) | ||
High (H) | (280, 300, 350, 380) | ||
Very High (VH) | (350, 450, 600, 600) | ||
Travel Time | Very Low (VL) | (0, 0, 1, 1.3) | |
Low (L) | (1, 1.3, 1.5, 2) | ||
Moderate (M) | (1.5, 2, 3, 3.5) | ||
High (H) | (3, 3.5, 4, 5) | ||
Very High (VH) | (4, 5, 6, 6) | ||
Safety Index | Very Low (VL) | (0, 0, 10, 20) | |
Low (L) | (10, 20, 30, 40) | ||
Moderate (M) | (30, 40, 60, 70) | ||
High (H) | (60, 70, 80, 90) | ||
Very High (VH) | (80, 90, 100, 100) |
Linguistic Term | Partition of the Triangular Membership Function |
---|---|
Very Low (VL) | (1, 1, 3) |
Low (L) | (1, 3, 5) |
Moderate (M) | (3, 5, 7) |
High (H) | (5, 7, 10) |
Very High (VH) | (7, 10, 10) |
Linguistic Term | Partition of the Triangular Membership Function |
---|---|
None | (0, 0, 0) |
Very Low (VL) | (1, 1, 30) |
Low (L) | (1, 30, 50) |
Medium (M) | (30, 50, 70) |
High (H) | (50, 70, 100) |
Very High (VH) | (70, 100, 100) |
Country | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Denmark | H | VH | M | M | VH | M & H | H |
Austria | M & H | H | H | H | L | M | H |
Ireland | M & H | M | H | H | M & H | VH | M |
France | M & H | M | H & VH | VH | M | H | M |
Finland | M & H | VH | M | L | VH | H | H |
The Netherlands | M & H | H | H | M | H | H | H |
Luxembourg | M & H | M | L | VL & L | VH | M & H | M & H |
Germany | M & H | H | L | H | H | M | M & H |
United Kingdom | M & H | M & H | L & M | H | L | H | M |
Belgium | M & H | H | M | L & M | M | M & H | M |
Sweden | M | VH | M & H | M | M | VH | M |
Italy | M | L & M | VH | VH | L | M | M |
Cyprus | M | VL | L | L | L | L & M | M & H |
Estonia | M | VL & L | VL | VL | H | VH | H |
Slovenia | L & M | VL | VL | VL | M | VH | H |
Latvia | L & M | VL | VL | VL | M & H | VH | M & H |
Spain | L & M | M | VH | VH | M | H | M & H |
Lithuania | L & M | VL | VL | VL | M | VH | M & H |
Slovakia | L & M | VL & L | VL & L | VL & L | L | M | M & H |
Croatia | L & M | L | M | M | M | VH | H |
Portugal | L & M | M | H & VH | H & VH | VH | H & VH | M & H |
Hungary | L & M | L | M | M | L | M | M & H |
Poland | L & M | M | M | M | L and M | M | M & H |
Bulgaria | L | L | L | L | L | L | M & H |
Romania | L | L | L | L | L | L | M & H |
Switzerland | VH | H & VH | M & H | M and H | M | M | H |
User | Cost-of-Living Index | Adjusted Quality of Life Ranking | Adjusted Adventure Ranking | Adjusted Heritage Ranking | Average Travel Cost (EUR) | Travel Time | Safety Index |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anna | VH | M | H | None | VH | None | M |
Peter | L | VH | M | M | None | VL | VH |
Bill | H | None | None | None | VH | VH | M |
Alice | VH | H | None | H | L | None | H |
Kate | L | VH | None | None | L | VH | VH |
George | VH | M | VH | None | VH | None | H |
Mary | M | VH | H | H | L | M | VH |
User | Switzerland | Spain | Cyprus | Denmark | Germany | Sweden |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anna | 0.28306 | 0.30873 | 0.24402 | 0.26545 | 0.24553 | 0.27831 |
Peter | 0.33640 | 0.33335 | 0.23953 | 0.33064 | 0.31293 | 0.31289 |
Bill | 0.20853 | 0.24571 | 0.28827 | 0.19456 | 0.20582 | 0.17042 |
Alice | 0.30122 | 0.30182 | 0.23590 | 0.29392 | 0.31571 | 0.27209 |
Kate | 0.31267 | 0.27246 | 0.27134 | 0.31837 | 0.29547 | 0.27976 |
User | France | Italy | Bulgaria | Switzerland |
---|---|---|---|---|
George | 0.27237 | 0.29692 | 0.29988 | 0.28067 |
Mary | 0.29732 | 0.32485 | 0.30253 | 0.26540 |
Gender | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Female | |||
Individual users | 15 | 12 | ||
Travel agency employees | 4 | 4 | ||
Age | ||||
18–25 | 26–35 | 36–45 | 46+ | |
Individual users | 5 | 10 | 8 | 4 |
Travel agency employees | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
Experience in computer usage | ||||
None | Little | Medium | Good | |
Individual users | 0 | 0 | 5 | 22 |
Travel agency employees | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
Experience in interaction with travel tools | ||||
None | Little | Medium | Good | |
Individual users | 0 | 0 | 9 | 18 |
Travel agency employees | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
Experience in interaction with ChatGPT | ||||
None | Little | Medium | Good | |
Individual users | 0 | 4 | 13 | 10 |
Travel agency employees | 0 | 1 | 4 | 3 |
Questions | Content |
---|---|
Q1 | How satisfied are you with the overall experience of using the software? |
Q2 | How easy was it to navigate and use the software? |
Q3 | Did you enjoy the overall design and appearance of the software? |
Q4 | How likely are you to use this software again? |
Q5 | Would you recommend this software to others? |
Q6 | Were the recommended destinations appealing and relevant? |
Q7 | Did the software’s recommendations align with your preferences and needs? |
Q8 | How would you rate the accuracy of the recommendations compared to other travel tools? |
Q9 | How would you rate the accuracy of the recommendations to ChatGPT’s suggestions? |
Q10 | Does this software, compared to other travel tools, offer a smoother and faster experience when providing recommendations? |
Q11 | Does this software, compared to ChatGPT, offer a smoother and faster experience when providing recommendations? |
Questions | Content |
---|---|
Q1 | How satisfied are you with the overall experience of using the software? |
Q2 | How easy was it to navigate and use the software? |
Q3 | Did you enjoy the overall design and appearance of the software? |
Q4 | Does the software save you time compared to manually researching travel recommendations? |
Q5 | How likely are you to incorporate this software into your daily workflow? |
Q6 | How likely are you to recommend this software to your clients or colleagues? |
Q7 | How would you rate the overall effectiveness of the travel recommendation software? |
Q8 | Were the recommended destinations appealing and relevant? |
Q9 | How relevant are the recommendations generated by the software for your clients’ preferences? |
Q10 | How does the design and usability of this software compare to other travel tools? |
Q11 | How would you rate the accuracy of the recommendations compared to other travel tools? |
Q12 | Does this software, compared to other travel tools, offer a smoother and faster experience when providing recommendations? |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chrysafiadi, K.; Kontogianni, A.; Virvou, M.; Alepis, E. Enhancing User Experience in Smart Tourism via Fuzzy Logic-Based Personalization. Mathematics 2025, 13, 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13050846
Chrysafiadi K, Kontogianni A, Virvou M, Alepis E. Enhancing User Experience in Smart Tourism via Fuzzy Logic-Based Personalization. Mathematics. 2025; 13(5):846. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13050846
Chicago/Turabian StyleChrysafiadi, Konstantina, Aristea Kontogianni, Maria Virvou, and Efthimios Alepis. 2025. "Enhancing User Experience in Smart Tourism via Fuzzy Logic-Based Personalization" Mathematics 13, no. 5: 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13050846
APA StyleChrysafiadi, K., Kontogianni, A., Virvou, M., & Alepis, E. (2025). Enhancing User Experience in Smart Tourism via Fuzzy Logic-Based Personalization. Mathematics, 13(5), 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13050846