Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Expert Systems with Applications

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/eswa

Green vehicle routing in urban zones – A neuro-fuzzy approach

Aleksandar D. Jovanović a,⇑, Dragan S. Pamučar b, Snežana Pejčić-Tarle c
a
High Technical School of Professional Studies, Kosovska 8, 34000 Kragujevac, Serbia
b
University of Defence in Belgrade, Department of Logistic, Pavla Jurišića Šturma 33, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
c
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, Vojvode Stepe 305, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: Local city authorities are making a serious effort to expand the number of low-greenhouse gas vehicles
Green vehicles (green vehicles) at home. There is no reliable methodology, however, to support the implementation of
Vehicle routing this passenger transportation concept. In order to optimize the green capacity, a system has been devel-
Fuzzy logic oped to support decision making in urban green vehicle routing. The objective of this paper is to propose
Public transport
a green vehicle distribution model in a public transportation network. The problem has been defined as a
problem of non-linear optimization with dispersed input parameters, requiring neuro-fuzzy logic. An
adaptive neural network was developed, taking into account the costs to be borne by operators and users,
and the environmental parameters along the observed vehicle route. Each input parameter of the neuro-
fuzzy model has been placed in a complex context. They were divided into the elements describing in
more detail the environmental status, the operator and passenger costs. The advantage of the model is
that several factors shaping the input parameters have been taken into consideration. On the other hand,
the complexity of urban systems management makes it a considerable challenge, and the surrounding
circumstances are difficult to predict accurately. Accordingly, the inputs of the green vehicle model were
fuzzified. The Index of Performance (IP) is the output, associated with each branch of the passenger trans-
portation network. The model has been tested on a part of the public transport system in central Bel-
grade. The results have proven a practical application possible, and a calibration of input parameters
allows for full implementation in public transport vehicle routing.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction permitted levels of SO2 and CO were exceeded at 33% pollution

Building a good place to live is no easy task today, as economy
relies heavily on the use of fossil fuels. The use of fossil fuels has
the innate risks threatening the human environment. It is notewor-
thy that compared to industrial states emissions from developing
countries now dominate. As GDP rates grow, exhaust emissions ap-
pear to go up, too. Besides, developing countries are yet to define
strategies for exhaust emission reductions, but government subsi-
dies for energy production technologies relying on renewable
sources of energy have dwindled as well (European Environment
Agency (EEA), 2013).
The EEA Report (2013) says that NOx, SO2 and CO emissions
resulting from fuel combustion increased significantly over the
growing use of diesel internal combustion engines. As for the three
greenhouse gases, NOx, SO2 and CO, the situation in Belgrade is far
more difficult than in other Serbia’s cities. The NOx levels that have
detrimental health effects were registered by 58 monitoring
stations in 44% areas along major highways in 2012, while the
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: caki1987@gmail.com (A.D. Jovanović), dpamucar@gmail.com
(D.S. Pamučar), snezana.tarle@gmail.com (S. Pejčić-Tarle).
monitoring locations (Serbian Environmental Protection Agency
(SEPA)., 2013). The European Environment Agency (Serbian Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (SEPA)., 2012) warned that Serbia
needed to cut transport energy consumption, which in 2012
dropped mere 4.3% compared to the record levels in 2007.
Epidemiological studies showed that the prevalence of asth-
matic bronchitis in children was increasing over prolonged expo-
sure to NOx, SO2 and CO (Serbian Environmental Protection
Agency (SEPA)., 2012). The SEPA Report (2012) warned that after
smoking, air pollution was a major health hazard. The report goes
on to say that in Serbia between 5000 and 7000 people die prema-
turely each year as a direct result of exposure to air pollution. Peo-
ple suffering from allergies and respiratory disorders will be most
severely affected by poor air quality (European Federation of
Allergy, 2011).
Apart from the harmful gas emissions, noise is another impor-
tant consequence of transport that can cause serious health prob-
lems (European Environment Agency (EEA), 2013). A report by the
European Environment Agency (EEA) released in 2013 shows that
in major European cities three of five people are exposed to the
harmful levels of transportation noise. Even in the EU hinterlands
24 million people are exposed to the levels of noise that can cause

0957-4174/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.11.015
3190 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203
physical and psychological disorders. A research by Schreyer et al.,
2004 illustrates the argument. The EU external costs arising from
the in traffic accidents caused by deteriorating air quality and
increasing noise rose to between 0.5% and 3.7% of GDP.
The dramatically growing effect of transport on the quality of
air made planners formulate the procedures taking into account
of the impact of transport on urban environments. There is no uni-
versal solution to all urban problems, but city authorities are focus-
ing on an integrated approach to address them. The way to do it is
to combine technological knowledge, including the development of
new vehicles, economic incentives and fresh concepts for the allo-
cation of green vehicle fleets.
Literature offers different definitions of the term ‘‘green vehi-
cle’’, but the focus is on separating the term ‘‘Absolutely Green
Vehicle (AGV)’’ from the term ‘‘Low Greenhouse Gas-Emitting
Vehicles’’. The AGV is a zero-emission vehicle, releasing no pollu-
tants. In other words, a vehicle using water or the energy of the
Sun is an absolutely green vehicle. Electric vehicles, on the other
hand, are considered to be AGV vehicles only if the electricity used
for propulsion is obtained from renewable energy sources. If, how-
ever, harmful substances are released in the production of electric-
ity, this is not an AGV vehicle. Vehicles running on biodiesel,
natural gas and the like are low greenhouse gas-emitting vehicles
(Serbian Department of Energy (SDE)., 2013).
Routing and allocating vehicles is a common organisational
problem. The basic Vehicle Routing Problem (VRP) can be defined
as follows: there is a set of homogenous vehicles of capacity (Q)
in a central depot and a set of users at known locations. Deliveries
from the central depot satisfy the user demand. Each route has to
begin and end at the central depot, and the total user demand on
each route must not exceed the capacity of the vehicles (Q). The
goal is to define a set of routes for the vehicles, minimising the to-
tal cost (Sbihi & Eglese, 2007).
The VRP studies discussed the paradigm of green transport be-
fore it was born. The introductory debate was opened by Dantzig
and Ramser (1959), but researchers failed to take into consider-
ation the useful implications of their work for the environment.
The early VPR studies were supposed to reduce the total length
of the routes and the total number of allocated vehicles. The
authors failed to provide an explicit explanation as to how the opti-
mization of routes can contribute to the environment, but it is clear
that a smaller number of vehicles along the routes directly cuts ex-
haust emissions based on reduced fuel consumption. In a word,
many vehicle routing studies can be included in the literature rel-
evant to green vehicle routing.
Reducing CO2 emissions by extending the traditional VRP objec-
tives of economic costs to consider relevant social and environ-
mental impact is achievable (Bektas & Laporte, 2011; Maden,
Eglese, & Black, 2010; McKinnon, 2007; Palmer, 2007; Sbihi &
Eglese, 2007). However, related studies on VRP from the perspec-
tive of minimizing emissions are seldom found. The traditional
VRP objective of reducing the total distance will in itself contribute
to a decrease of fuel consumption and environmental pollutant
emissions. But this relationship needs to be directly measured
using more accurate formulations. Pronello and André (2007) sug-
gested that reliable models to measure the pollution generated by
vehicle routes need to take into account more factors, such as the
traveling time when the engine is cold. Only with these models can
the environmental benefit in VRP be quantified. Sbihi and Eglese
(2007) considered a Time-dependent VRP (TDVRP) in the context
of traffic congestion. Since less pollution is produced when the
vehicles are at best speeds, directing them away from congestion
tends to be more environmental friendly, even though it leads to
longer traveling distance. Maden et al. (2010) also presented a
TDVRP with congestion and reported about a 7% reduction of CO2
emissions based on an emission measurement function was
observed after planning routes according to the time-varying
speeds. However, the objective of their VRP model remains the
minimization of the total travel time rather than the reduction of
emissions. Palmer (2007) developed an integrated routing and car-
bon dioxide emissions model and calculated the amount of CO2
emitted on the journey as well as the travelling time and distance.
The paper examined how the speed affects the reduction of CO2
emissions in different congestion scenarios with time windows.
The results showed that about 5% of reduction of CO2 emissions
could be achieved. Bauer, Bektas, and Crainic (2010) explicitly fo-
cus on minimizing greenhouse gas emissions in a model of inter-
modal freight transport, showing the potential of intermodal
freight transport for reducing greenhouse emissions. Fagerholt, La-
porte, and Norstad (2010) tried to reduce the fuel consumption and
fuel emissions by optimizing speed in a shipping scenario. Given
the fixed shipping routes and the time windows, the speed of each
segment of a route is optimized in order to yield fuel savings.
Some studies sought to formulate a comprehensive objective
function which measures economic costs and environmental costs
so as to meet efficiency objectives and green criteria simulta-
neously. Ubeda, Arcelus, and Faulin (2011) conducted a case study
in which minimization of both the distances and pollutant emis-
sions is the objective. The results also revealed that backhauling
seems more effective in controlling emissions. This suggests that
backhauling could be initiated by companies to enhance energy
consumption efficiency and reduce environmental impact. It ap-
pears that this paper is the first to incorporate minimizing green-
house gas emissions in the model of Vehicle Routing Problem
with Backhauls. Bektas and Laporte (2011) proposed a Pollution
Routing Problem with or without time windows and developed a
comprehensive objective function that integrates the minimization
of the cost of carbon emissions along with the operational costs of
drivers and fuel consumption. However, their model assumed a
free-flow speed of at least 40 km/h, which was contrary to the real
world situation where congestion occurs. Following up this re-
search, Demir, Bektas, and Laporte (2012) proposed an extended
Adaptive Large Neighborhood Search for Pollution Routing Prob-
lem (PRP) in order to enhance the computation efficiency for med-
ium or large scale PRP. Faulin, Juan, Lera, and Grasman (2011)
presented a capacitated VRP with environmental criteria and con-
sidered more complex environmental impact. Apart from the tradi-
tional economic costs measurement and the environmental costs
that are caused by polluting emissions, the environmental costs
derived from noise, congestion and wear and tear on infrastructure
were also considered. Xiao, Zhao, Kaku, and Xu (2011) placed a
heavy emphasis on fuel consumption rates as a function of vehicle
load. Xiao et al. (2011) optimised the classic VRP by using a simu-
lated annealing algorithm. The results show that the model can re-
duce fuel consumption by average 5%, compared to the standard
VRP models. Erdogan and Miller-Hooks (2012) introduced the
Green Vehicle Routing Problem G-VRP. The paper focused on rout-
ing a fleet of bio-fuelled vehicles, modifying the Clark-Wright algo-
rithm based on heuristic procedures. The use of biofuels was
discussed in the context of overcoming the difficulties arising from
the use of fossil fuels. The major problems identified in the re-
search were increasing exhaust gasses (NOx, SO2 and CO) and the
limited vehicle driving range combined with limited refuelling
infrastructure.
Apart from the abovementioned research, a number of publica-
tions discussed the organisation of green transport, with an accent
on pollution. Bektas and Laporte (2011) developed a green vehicle
routing model that expanded the classic VRP. In the advanced
model, the objective function is based not only on the Euclidean
distances between the nodes and travel times, but also the concen-
tration of exhaust gasses on the link and fuel consumption. Xiao
et al. (2011) placed a heavy emphasis on fuel consumption rates
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203
as a function of vehicle load. Xiao et al. (2011) optimised the classic
VRP by using a simulated annealing algorithm. The results show
that the model can reduce fuel consumption by average 5%, com-
pared to the standard VRP models. Erdogan and Miller-Hooks
(2012) introduced the Green Vehicle Routing Problem G-VRP. The
paper focused on routing a fleet of bio-fuelled vehicles, modifying
the Clark-Wright algorithm based on heuristic procedures. The use
of biofuels was discussed in the context of overcoming the difficul-
ties arising from the use of fossil fuels. The major problems identi-
fied in the research were increasing exhaust gasses (NOx, SO2 and
CO) and the limited vehicle driving range combined with limited
refuelling infrastructure.
Over the past few years, the evolution of operational research
and growing computer power incited interest in this concept.
Cipriani, Fusco, and Petrelli (2006) defined the G-VRP as a nonlin-
ear optimisation problem, taking into account both discrete and
continuous variables. A group of Italian authors (Beltran, Carrese,
Cipriani, & Petreli, 2009) studied the deployment of a green bus
fleet in an urban network, taking into account all traffic within
the network. Proceeding from the assumed user equilibrium, they
developed a model for the deployment of a green fleet based on a
genetic algorithm. They considered sensitive areas (residential
zones, parks, etc.) and placed green lines alongside these zones,
considerably reducing pollution levels.
Urban systems are among the most complex, including intricate
mechanism and blurred boundaries and layers between them,
which recommends them for the application of fuzzy logic. Gener-
ally speaking, the problem is how to make a proper estimate of the
development of all subsystems comprising an urban system, along
with the impact the subsystems may have on each other. Shang
and Xu (1996) developed a hybrid expert system for decision-
making support, based on artificial neural networks and as a
function of urban development. The system appears to be very
successful in estimating urban development and defining its com-
ponents, including public transport.
Tao and Ximniao (1997) developed a method based on a fuzzy
clustering analysis, estimating the impact of transport on the qual-
ity of air in urban areas. Apart from Tao-Ximniao fuzzy clustering
analysis, Zimmermann (1999) studied uncertainty modelling. Fus-
co, Gori, and Petrelli (2002) and Cipriani et al. (2006) defined a
transport network design methodology, using heuristic methods
as a tool to establish the routes. The set of routes is the input in
a genetic algorithm, combining different routes and changing them
to produce the best solution in a reasonable time. Cipriani et al.
(2006) suggested that the methodology should develop further,
taking into account the transport requirements that might affect
the transport network modal distribution.
Other important researchers of green vehicle routing are Baaj
and Mahmassani (1995) and Carrese and Gori (2002). They devel-
oped a new approach based on meta-heuristic techniques - simu-
lated annealing and tabu search. Furthermore, Ngamchai and
Lovell (2003) proposed the application of genetic algorithms in
G-solving the G-VRP, while Fan and Machemehl (2006) studied
transport requirements as a function of green vehicle distribution
by transport modes. Other authors, too, were involved in GVRP
studies, including Suzuki (2011), Kuo (2010) and Faulin et al.
(2011).
Over the past few years a number of vehicle routing models
have been developed (Muyldermans and Pang (2010), Mu and Eg-
lese (2011), Pang (2011), Marinakis (2012), Tasan and Gen (2012),
Nguyen, Crainic, and Toulouse (2013), Stenger, Vigo, Enz, and
Schwind (2013), Vidal, Crainic, Gendreau, and Prins (2013)). Lin,
Choy, Ho, Chung, and Lam (2013) offer a detailed review of studies
on vehicle- and green vehicle routing. Shing and Jang (1993,1995),
and Shi and Mizumoto (2000) list the applications of neuro-fuzzy
approach, describing also the theoretical groundwork of the model.
3191
Based on the EU environmental directives, public transport
operators in urban areas started to add green vehicles to their
fleets. At this point, there are a limited number of these vehicles,
and they should be integrated into the existing vehicle fleets to
successfully reduce pollution levels. More specifically, the problem
lies in identifying a combination of green and traditional lines to
optimize their environmental impact. Available literature shows
that the authors failed to consider green vehicle routing based on
a neuro-fuzzy approach, taking into account environmental
parameters, operator/passenger costs and their impact on green
vehicle routing. The expectation is that transport companies will
need to add more low greenhouse gas-emitting vehicles to their
fleets, which makes the concept all the more important.
This paper shows how to apply an adaptive neural network to
green vehicle routing. It takes into account the costs to be borne
by operators and users, and the environmental parameters within
the observed route. Each input of the neuro-fuzzy model has
undergone complex analysis. The input parameters were parsed,
producing the elements more descriptive of the environment and
the operator/passenger costs. The major advantage of the model
is that it can simultaneously analyse several factors influencing
the input variables. For example, the input analysis of local envi-
ronmental status involves the parameters of noise and harmful ex-
haust (NOx, SO2 and CO). Mathematical transformations are used to
inter-relate the parameters and describe the input variable local
environmental status. The other input variables of the neuro-fuzzy
model are broken down in the same way. The practical application
of the model is that operators and city authorities can use as a sup-
port system in the decision-making process. The purpose of the
model is to distribute the capacity to minimize operator/user costs
and expand positive environmental impacts to the utmost. The pa-
per outlined a generic model, which with slightly modified inputs,
can be used in public transport routing in other cities, too.
Fuzzy logic is used to exploit the uncertainty arising from the
description of variables. Fuzzy logic has been used since the analyt-
ical methods like Monte Carlo (MC) apply only when there is an ex-
act formula to produce outputs depending on input parameters.
The distribution of input parameters based on an analytical model
is possible if the distribution probability is known for all input
parameters, and if all input parameters are independent. Analytical
methods can also define the individual contribution of each param-
eter, and the inter-reaction of input parameters to output changes.
However, it is only in simple cases with a small number of vari-
ables that the distribution can be calculated correctly. In a more
complex situation, it is not possible to define an explicit output
function as a function of input parameters. As analytical methods
are inappropriate, an alternative method is called for in this
situation.
The next chapter presents the stages of the green vehicle rout-
ing model based on modified Kruskal’s algorithm and adaptive
neural network. The design and training of the adaptive neural net-
work are described, and the model tested. The final considerations
offer new directions for future research to define an optimal green
vehicle distribution.
2. Description of neuro-fuzzy model for green vehicle routing
The problem belongs in a group of assignment problem. The
assignment problem is a linear programming problem, assigning
N resources/vehicles with M operators/links, to maximum effect.
More specifically, it is necessary to define an objective function,
that is, to distribute low greenhouse gas-emitting vehicles to the
routes with increased environmental parameters and minimal
costs. The problem is treated as a mathematical programming
problem. The disadvantage of an approach based on mathematical
3192 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203
programming is that it is not easy to formulate an objective func-
tion and define hard constraints. In addition, information available
to decision-makers are often vague or given in a descriptive form.
Consequently the problem of Green Bus Fleet assignment may be
defined as a non-linear optimisation problem.
This paper has addressed the problem by suggesting the appli-
cation of a neuro-fuzzy model. The assignment of green vehicles to
the routes is the optimisation problem as a function of operator/
passenger costs, air quality and noise levels. To solve the problem,
the application of an Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Interference System
(ANFIS) has been suggested, based on three assignment criteria:
x1 – Operator’s Costs x2 – Passenger’s Costs and x3 – Local Environ-
mental Status. The Performance Indices for network links are the
ANFIS output. There are two phases of the Green Bus Fleet (GBF)
assignment algorithm developed in this paper (Fig. 1).
Phase I calculates ANFIS input parameters and defines a perfor-
mance index for each link in the network.
Phase II allocates IP values to the links and finds a maximum
spanning tree based on modified Kruskal’s algorithm. Then the
green line terminals are defined, together with the combination
of routes between the terminals. The last step is to sort out the
routes by the assigned IP. After this, a maximum spanning tree is
found based on modified Kuskal’s algorithm. A detailed description
of the green vehicle routing model will be presented at the testing
stage.
The next chapter describes the design of the ANFIS model to de-
fine IP links and input parameters.
2.1. Adaptive network architecture and definition of input parameters
The Fuzzy Logic System (FLS) of reasoning is an integral part of
ANFIS. One of the first problems the analyst is coming across while
developing a FLS is to define a set of linguistic rules and member-
ship function parameters of input/output pairs. Generating the
membership function of fuzzy sets and the rules under which
experts make decisions imply extensive communication with a
large number of experts. On the other hand, the membership
functions of fuzzy sets describing the same term, which have been
suggested by the experts, can vary widely. Accordingly, the
Fig. 1. Green Vehicle Routing Model, Phases.
characteristics of a developed FLS depend on the number of avail-
able experts and the ability to formulate their decision-making
strategy. Based on the analysis of the techniques and literature,
the three criteria influencing green vehicle deployment and the
definition of IP nodes have been identified. The FLS input variables
include the following: Operator Costs (x1), Passenger Costs (x2) and
Local Environmental Status (x3). Together with the three input
variables, the FLS has one output variable (y) the Index of Perfor-
mance (IP). The intervals of input and output variables are given
in Table 1:
The mathematical formulation of FLS input variables follows:
The criterion Operator Costs (x1) is calculated by the Eq. (1)
fx1 ¼ C km  li þ C n  t pb ð1Þ
Where Ckm – operational costs per kilometre; li – Euclidean distance
of the link; Cn – staff costs per vehicle per hour; tpb – bus drive time
on the link.
Passenger Cost (x2) is calculated by the Eq. (2)
X
j
fx2 ¼ C uj  qij  ðtv þ t p Þ ð2Þ
i¼1
Where j – a type of travel purpose (business trip, commuting, stu-
dent travel, school trip, leisure and shopping); Cu – user costs per
hour; qi – passenger demand per network link per hour; tp – walk
time to the link; tv – passenger drive time on the link.
The passenger costs depend on the category of the passenger,
and it is necessary to determine the purpose of a travel. The model
covers five types of travel: work-related movement, school move-
ment, shopping movement, leisure movement and other move-
ment. Information on the purpose of travel is the result of a
network research. Passenger Demands (qi) are grouped by links,
in one-hour intervals. The result is, therefore, a sum of demands
from all stations of the given link, in a unit of time.
It is important to note that operator/user costs within a net-
work, the input variables x1 and x2, are unique for each network.
In other words, the nature of these data differs from case to case,
which requires separate research for any given network.
Local Environment Status (x3) is calculated by the Eq. (3)
fx3 ¼ W 1 ðx1  SO2 þ x2  CO þ x3  NOX Þ þ W 2  LB ð3Þ
Where Wi – weight factor of components for environmental status
estimate; xi – weight factor of components for air quality estimate;
SO2, CO, NOx – parameters of air quality estimate; LB – noise levels
per link.
In analysing the parameters of an air quality estimate, SO2, CO
and NOx are considered the representative compounds because
of the harmful effect they have on the environment. The released
quantity of sulphur dioxide depends directly on a SO2 ratio in the
fuel and the type of engine combustion, and the deposition of sul-
phur dioxide acidifies the ecosystems. Nitrogen monoxides have
been selected for multiple detrimental effects on the environment
(they acidify ecosystems, destroy ozone layers, etc.). Carbon mon-
oxide’s cytotoxicity makes it one of the most dangerous air pollu-
tants. Exhaust fumes for internal combustion engines are among
the most important sources of this dangerous compound (Serbian
Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), 2012).
Table 1
Domain intervals for x1, x2, x3 and y.
Variable Domain
x1 [0,1]
x2 [0,1]
x3 [0,1]
y [0,10]
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203 3193

The ultimate values of the input variables x1, x2 and x3, which
are the highest permitted levels of the given parameters, have been
defined based on recommendations by the Serbian Environmental
Protection Agency (SEPA), modelled after Tao and Xinmiao (1998).
Table 2 shows the parameters suggested for Serbia.
The value of the above parameters depends on the economic
status and policy of each state that might apply the algorithm.
Based on statistics provided by the SEPA agency, the following
ultimate values have been defined: SO2[0, 125] lg/m3, CO[0, 10]
lg/m3 (the annual eight-hour maximum value) and NOX[0, 85] -
lg/m3.
For the criteria functions (fx1 ; fx2 and fx3 ) to go through FLS, they
need to be normalized first. Since fx1 and fx2 are cost criteria (lower
values desirable), the normalisation process follows the Eq. (4).
fxi  fxmin
fxn ¼ 1  ; ð4Þ
fxmax
The normalisation of benefit criteria (higher values desirable) fx3 fol-
lows the Eq. (5).
fxi
fxn ¼ ; ð5Þ
fxmax
After the FLS input parameters were defined, a base of rules was
formed. For the full description of input criteria based on Eqs. (6)
and (7), relative importance of the criteria and a degree of their
influence on IP were defined. The relative importance of criteria
were copied to the rule base later.
" #1=n 8 2" #1=n 391
kj  g
w0ki Y n <X n Yn = where the FLS system stays inert to the input parameters values.
g
wki ¼ PK ¼ kj wki  4 kj wki 5 ð6Þ
g0 : i¼1 ; The steep segments represent the values of input parameters,
j¼1 kj  wki j¼1 j¼1
X
K
fk ¼ 1;
w fk 2 ½0; 1;
w k 2 ½0; 1
j¼1
Where kj ; kj 2 ½0; 1 is the preference of the j decision maker, i.e., the
degree of confidence, w0ki is the weight ratio of the i criteria to the k
decision maker; n is the total number of decision makers participat-
ing in the research. The degree of confidence is specified for each
decision maker individually, based on their degree of confidence.
In order to define the weight ratios, ten (n = 10) decision makers
were interviewed.
To describe the input criteria as a membership function, the
Gaussian distribution was used (Fig. 2). The bell curve was chosen
because it is easy to manipulate while adjusting FLS; it also describes
well the input variables and provides appropriate sensitivity of the
system. In addition, the adjustment of the membership functions
provides for the smallest error of the ANFIS model output.
For all FLS input variables, it is necessary to define not only the
type of membership function, but also the number of membership
functions. The larger the number of membership functions, the lar-
ger the number of rules in the base.
On the other hand, the larger number of rules makes the adjust-
ment of the system more difficult. The recommendation is,
therefore, to start with the lowest number of membership functions,
depending on the nature of the variables. Reducing the number of
membership functions, however, must not result in the incomplete
description of an input variable. Proceeding from these points, and
having adjusted the system with a different number of membership
functions, the FLS input variables are defined to have five membership
functions each (Fig. 2): very low (VL), low (L), medium (M), high (H)
and very high (VH). Following the FLS adjustment, the parameters of
input variables membership functions are defined as follows: Opera-
tor Costs (Kx1MF1 gmf(0.0797, 0), Kx1MF2 gmf(0.089, 0.142), Kx1MF3
gmf(0.073, 0.423), Kx1MF4 gmf(0.106, 0.668), Kx1MF5 gmf(0.134,
0.984)), Passenger Costs (Kx2MF1 gmf(0.1157, 0), Kx2MF2 gmf(0.1098
0.343), Kx2MF3 gmf(0.084, 0.545), Kx2MF4 gmf(0.106, 0.795), Kx2MF5
gmf(0.106, 0.966)) and Local Environmental Status (Kx3MF1
gmf(0.0753, 0), Kx3MF2 gmf(0.0786 0.2209), Kx3MF3 gmf(0.0843
0.4841), Kx3MF4 gmf(0.085, 0.689), Kx3MF5 gmf(0.08687 0.929)). As a
result, adequate sensitivity and full description of input parameters
have been achieved.
A comparison between FLS output data and the desired set of
solutions showed that the system failed to produce satisfactory re-
sults. The difference between the expected result and the output
criteria function was not within tolerance limits. The attempt to
reach satisfactory output values by changing the type and param-
eters of membership functions failed to produce expected results.
Table 3 shows outputs and expected values of criteria functions
of the network links. A total of 50 links have been processed.
The analysis of the FLS output produced the mean error of
1.371. Aside from this comparably high error, the FLS was much
too sensitive for certain input parameters, or not sensitive enough
for some values. Fig. B1A (Appendix B) shows a set of FSL outputs,
i.e. the scenario that describes reaction of the system to individual
input values. The flat surfaces (plateaus) represent the places
which FLS is overly sensitive to. The attempt to reduce the output
error and improve the sensitivity of FLS by correcting the rule base
and changing the parameters of membership functions failed to
ð7Þ
produce expected results.
Consequently, the FLS system was copied to ANFIS (Fig. 3). The
ANFIS was used to additionally adjust the FLS membership func-
tions by training the neural network. The ‘‘backpropagation‘‘ algo-
rithm was used for the ANFIS training.
As shown in Fig. 3 ANFIS has 20 rules presented in the following
form:
IF x1 is A11 and x2 is A12 and x3 is A13 THEN
y = f1(x1, x2, x3) = p1x1 + q1x2 + r1x3 + s1.
Where A11(VH) is one of five membership functions of the input
variable. Operator Costs, A12(VH), one of five membership functions
of the input variable Passenger Costs and A13(VL) one of five mem-
bership functions of the input variable Local Environmental Status
(Fig. 2).
Each node of the network in the same layer exercises the same
type of the function. Oji marks the output of the i-node in the j-
layer. In the forward pass, neuron outputs are calculated layer by
layer and the consequent parameters are identified by the least
squares estimator to obtain the final single output. The forward
pass operation on each layer is described below:
Layer 1. The nodes of the first layer are verbal categories of the
input variables quantified by fuzzy sets. Each node of the first layer
is an adaptive node, described by a membership function,
lxi ðxÞ; i ¼ 1; 2; :::; 5. The membership functions are described by

Table 2
Ultimate Values of Input Parameters.

Input Parameters Ckm Cn tpb Cu qi tp tv Lb

n.j./km n.j./h min n.j./h put/h/st min min dB
Ultimate Values (50–100) (200–250) (3–10) (30–70) (350–500) (2–10) (2–7) (50–120)
3194 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

VH H M L VL VH H M L VL VL L M H VH
1 1 1

0.8 0.8 0.8

Degree of membership

Degree of membership

Degree of membership
0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0 0 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Operator Costs Passenger Costs Local Environmental Status

Fig. 2. Membership Function before ANFIS Training.

Table 3
Characteristics of 50 Network Links.

No. x1 x2 x3 fraining fFIS No. x1 x2 x3 fraining fFIS

1. 0.37 0.26 0.7 6,604 5,304 26. 0.72 0.49 0.25 8,507 6,945
2. 0.56 0.56 0.24 7,899 6,056 27. 0.94 0.93 0.68 9,984 8,490
3. 0.19 0.90 0.66 7,795 6,535 28. 0.34 0.32 0.89 6,921 5,880
4. 0.18 0.44 0.43 6,019 4,907 29. 0.62 0.84 0.89 9,551 7,816
5. 0.97 0.24 0.25 8,726 7,504 30. 0.21 0.43 0.41 6,086 4,976
6. 0.85 0.43 0.63 9,479 7,821 31. 0.9 0.62 0.75 9,898 8,380
7. 0.58 0.51 0.61 8,672 7,374 32. 0.91 0.37 0.8 9,603 8,003
8. 0.31 0.32 0.41 6,165 5,082 33. 0.1 0.90 0.45 6,877 5,477
9. 0.16 0.50 0.66 6,453 5,368 34. 0.46 0.15 0.8 6,941 5,707
10. 0.25 0.18 0.56 5,545 4,635 35. 0.51 0.40 0.48 7,726 6,177
11. 0.82 0.79 0.85 9,900 8,415 36. 0.6 0.24 0.77 7,954 6,254
12. 0.78 0.62 0.94 9,762 8,327 37. 0.48 0.49 0.17 7,043 5,745
13. 0.82 0.73 0.54 9,767 8,158 38. 0.56 0.66 0.76 9,012 7,463
14. 0.39 0.45 0.44 7,180 5,878 39. 0.29 0.83 0.31 7,253 6,057
15. 0.7 0.71 0.21 8,817 7,181 40. 0.83 0.41 0.46 9,136 7,531
16. 0.38 0.87 0.17 7,484 6,231 41. 0.81 0.79 0.3 9,498 7,778
17. 0.22 0.52 0.16 5,762 4,753 42. 0.5 0.79 0.2 8,114 6,910
18. 0.72 0.92 0.92 9,855 8,325 43. 0.73 0.91 0.59 9,768 8,178
19. 0.28 0.32 0.46 6,080 5,001 44. 0.61 0.13 0.49 7,139 5,245
20. 0.68 0.72 0.63 9,489 7,796 45. 0.65 0.24 0.39 7,675 6,284
21. 0.49 0.86 0.23 8,280 7,053 46. 0.98 0.89 0.37 9,917 8,442
22. 0.13 0.62 0.47 6,353 5,016 47. 0.22 0.96 0.6 7,944 6,810
23. 0.27 0.25 0.12 5,214 4,431 48. 0.57 0.29 0.52 7,609 6,005
24. 0.89 0.58 0.67 9,819 8,209 49. 0.55 0.22 0.49 7,147 5,905
25. 0.18 0.17 0.77 5,566 4,553 50. 0.69 0.48 0.59 9,031 7,496

the Gaussian distribution characterised by two parameters c (the O4i ¼ xi  fi ¼ xi  ðp1 x1 þ q1 x2 þ r 1 x3 þ s1 Þ; i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; n ð11Þ
centre of the function) and r (the width of the function).
Where n is the total number of rules in the rule base, and pi, qi, ri
2
12ðxc
r Þ and si a set of consequent parameters of the rule i.
Gaussianðx; c; rÞ ¼ e ð8Þ
Layer 5. The only node of Layer 5 is the fixed node where the
As the fuzzy rules are the if-then rules, ,,If - premise, Then - conse- ANFIS output result is calculated. This is a fuzzy set with defined
quence‘‘, the categories of input variables quantified by fuzzy sets degrees of membership of possible IP values of the given link
are shown as adaptive nodes of the first layer. (node) of the network. Defuzzification is carried out in the fifth-
Layer 2. Each node of this layer calculates the minimum value of layer node. The output result is a real number in the interval
three input values of the adaptive neural network. The output val- [0, 10]:
ues of the Layer 2 nodes are the rule signification.
X
20

O2i ¼ xi ¼ lAi ðx1 Þ  lBi ðx2 Þ  lC i ðx3 Þ ð9Þ O51 ¼ Ov erall output ¼ xi  f i
i¼1
P20
Layer 3. Each i-node in this layer calculates the total weight of i¼1 xi  ðp1 x1 þ q1 x2 þ r1 x3 þ s1 Þ
the i-rule from the rule base by the following equation ¼ P20 ð12Þ
i¼1 xi
xi
O3i ¼ xi ¼ Pn ; i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; n ð10Þ where:
i¼1 xi
x1 ¼lA11 ðx1 Þ  lA12 ðx2 Þ  lA13 ðx3 Þ ð13Þ
Layer 4. This layer has 20 adaptive nodes representing the prefer-
ence that a certain link (node) of the network is allocated the high- x2 ¼lA11 ðx1 Þ  lA12 ðx2 Þ  lA23 ðx3 Þ ð14Þ
est IP value. Each neuron in this layer is connected to the respective ...
normalization neuron in the third layer, and also receives initial in- x20 ¼lA41 ðx1 Þ  lA32 ðx2 Þ  lA53 ðx3 Þ ð15Þ
put signals x1, x2 and x3. A defuzzification neuron computed the
,,weighted consequent value’’ of a given rule as: ( is the T-norm).
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203 3195

Oi1 Oi2 Oi3 Oi4 Oi5

x

P 1

VL P 2

L P 3
X1
М
P 4

H P 5

VH P 6

P 7

NORMALIZATION
VL

L P 8
y
X2 P
9 ∑
М

VH
P 15

VL P 16

L P 17

X3
М P
18

P 19
H

P 20
VH
y

Fig. 3. The architecture of neuro-fuzzy network and network IP generation.

The output function is linearly dependent on the parameters of Therefore, the derivative of the premise parameter can be expressed
the fuzzy-rule consequences. The linear dependence is represented in detail according to the ANFIS architecture as
by the Eq. (16).
@Ep @E @O5 @O4 @O3 @O2 @O1
¼ ð21Þ
f ¼ x1  f1 þ x2  f2 þ x3  f3 @Oi;p @O5 @O4 @O3 @O2 @O1 @ a
¼ ðx1  xÞ  p1 þ ðx1  yÞ  q1 þ ðx1 Þ  r 1 þ ðx2  xÞ  p2 The derivative from layer 5 to layer 4 is
þ ðx2  yÞ  q2 þ ðx2 Þ  r 2 þ ðx3  xÞ  p3 þ ðx3  yÞ  q3 P 
20
@O5 @ i¼1 xi  fi
þ ðx3 Þ  r3 ð16Þ ¼ ð22Þ
@O4 @ ð xi  f i Þ
After the consequent parameters are identified, the network output
where xi is normalised firing strength of the i th rule. The derivative
can be computed and the error measure for p th entry of the train-
from layer 4 to layer 3 is as follows
ing data can be obtained
 2 @O4 @ ðxi  fi Þ
Ep ¼ T p  Op ð17Þ ¼ ¼ fi ð23Þ
@O3 @ ðxi Þ
where Tp and Op are the desired output and the ANFIS output, where f is the consequence parameters set. The derivative from
respectively. Hence, the root mean square error of the training data layer 3 to layer 2 is as follows
set is   Pn
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P ffi @O3 @ xi k¼1 xk  xi
Ep ¼ Pn ¼ P  ð24Þ
E¼ ð18Þ @O2 @ ðxi Þ k¼1 xk
n
xk 2 k¼1
P
Where n is the total number of rules (in our case 20 rules) in the k th
In the backward pass, error signals are propagated and the anteced-
layer. The derivative from layer 2 to layer 1 is
ent parameters are updated according to the chain rule. According
!
to the gradient descent, the error rate o Ep/ o O for p th training data @O2 @ Y
and for each output O can be calculated from (17) as ¼ Ak ð25Þ
@O1 @Am Ak 2RðAm Þ;Ak –Am
@Ep  
¼ 2  T i;p  Oi;p ð19Þ Where Ak e R (Am) is the membership grades which make premise
@Oi;p
part of the rule containing the fuzzy set Am. The updated premise
The error rate for the node in the i th position of the k th layer, are parameters set (for Gaussian MF), the derivative from (8) for each
derived by the chain rule premise parameter are
@Ep X
N
@Ep @Om;p @OðxÞ ðx  cÞ
2
¼ ð20Þ ¼ lAi ðxÞ ð26Þ
@Oi;p m¼1 @Om;p @Oi;p @r r3
3196 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

@OðxÞ ðx  cÞ2
¼ lAi ðxÞ
@c r2
Therefore, an update applied to a parameter r of the Gaussian acti-
vation function used in neuron A11 for example, can be expressed as
follows
@E
rnew ¼ rold  g
@r
where g is the learning rate which can be further expressed as
k During the ANFIS training, the parameters of membership func-
g ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
P  
ffi ð29Þ
@E 2
a @a
where k is the step size, the length of each gradient transition in the
parameter space. The k value can be changed to vary the speed of
convergence (Jang, 1993).
2.2. Training of ANFIS
ANFIS can be trained to learn from given data. As we can ob-
serve from the ANFIS architecture (Fig. 3), in order to configure
an ANFIS model for a specific problem, we need to specify the fuzzy
rules and the activation functions (i.e. membership functions) of
fuzzification neurons. For the fuzzy rules, we specify the anteced-
ent fuzzy sets once we know the specific problem domain; while
for the consequents of the fuzzy rules, the parameters (e.g. pi, qi, -
ri and si) are formed and adjusted by certain learning algorithm
in the training process (in this case backpropagation algorithm).
For ANFIS models, the most commonly used activation function
is the so-called bell-shaped function (Fig. 4), described as
 1
y ¼ 1 þ ½x  s=r t
Where r, s and t are the parameters that respectively control the
slope, center and width of the bell-shaped function. And in the
training process, these parameters can be specified and adjusted
by the learning algorithm.
The training algorithm is the backpropagation algorithm, using
the recursive error calculation (squares the error based on output
functions of each network node), starting with the output layer
and then back to the input layer. Back propagation is a systematic
training method, providing a computationally efficient method for
changing the synaptic weights in the neural network, with
differentiable activation function units. The error back propagation
algorithm uses the method of supervised learning. We provide the
algorithm with a recorded set of observations or the training set
(Table A1), including the examples of inputs and desired outputs
that we want the network to compute, and then the error (a
difference between the actual and expected results) is computed.
ð27Þ The idea of the back propagation algorithm is to reduce the error
until the ANFIS learns the training data.
By training the neural network, the original input/output mem-
bership functions of fuzzy sets are adjusted by means of numerical
examples. If there is a difference between the obtained and
expected results, the links between the neurons are modified to
ð28Þ reduce the error, i.e. membership functions are adjusted in
adaptive nodes. Fig. 5 shows the ANFIS membership functions after
training.
tions of input variables changed. When the final phase of the ANFIS
training was over, the final parameters of membership functions
were obtained: Operator Costs (Kx1MF1 gmf(0.17, -0.01811), Kx1MF2
gmf(0.160, 0.252), Kx1MF3 gmf(0.154, 0.484), Kx1MF4 gmf(0.175,
0.717), Kx1MF5 gmf(0.190, 1.033)), Passenger Costs (Kx2MF1
gmf(0.112, 0.01957), Kx2MF2 gmf(0.137, 0.197), Kx2MF3 gmf(0.161,
0.435), Kx2MF4 gmf(0.180, 0.742), Kx2MF5 gmf(0.226, 1.034)) and Lo-
cal Environmental Status (Kx3MF1 gmf(0.167, -1.04e-017), Kx3MF2
gmf(0.157, 0.238), Kx3MF3 gmf(0.171, 0.487), Kx3MF4 gmf(0.173,
0.750), Kx3MF5 gmf(0.1837, 1.00)). The appropriate sensitivity and
full description of input parameters have been achieved.
ANFIS has been trained with 750 numerical data (training
pairs). Appendix A (Table A1) shows a set of 316 training pairs used
for the ANFIS training. During the training, data from the training
set xk, k = 1, 2,. . .,n, where n – total number of ANFIS inputs, are
passed through the network periodically.
The ANFIS training was carried out in 250 epochs (Fig. 6). When
the training process started, the ANFIS output error was 0.984.
After 250 epochs, the error was reduced to the acceptable 0.090.
Table 4 shows a comparative set of ANFIS output data and part
of the training set data. Another conclusion was that the neuro-
ð30Þ
fuzzy network was trained and able to generalise new input data
for which it wasn’t trained.
After the training, the system was sensitive and the gradience of
output existed. The inert and too sensitive segments of the systems
were eliminated, as opposed to the fuzzy model (Fig. B1A). Fig. B1B
(Appendix B) shows a set of permitted ANFIS solutions after the
training, i.e. the scenario describing reactions by the system to
individual input values.
The five-layer adaptive network was tested on 69 links, con-
necting the nodes of a network designed to simulate the conditions
of downtown Belgrade. The values of the criteria describing the ob-
served link were passed through ANFIS, resulting in the network
nodes IPs.
3. Model testing

Serbia’s Environmental Protection prescribes as mandatory the

preparation of the National Environmental Protection Program.
1
Whereas global warming is a chief priority for most European
states, Serbia didn’t sign the Kyoto Protocol before 2008. The coun-
0.8 try does not have an official list of the sources of greenhouse gas
emissions. Based on the International Energy Agency’s statistics
0.6 in 2012, Serbia released nearly 55 tonnes of CO2 in 2010. Having
in mind the relationship between CO2, total primary energy pro-
duction and the population, Serbia fares worse than the other
0.4
states of the region when it comes to the emissions released during
production process. On the other hand, Serbia’s growth rate is one
0.2 of the highest in the region (over 2.5% in the past four years),
recording slight energy efficiency improvements though. Given
that the latest data that could have been compared with interna-
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 tional standards date back to 2010, the assumption is that the
greenhouse gas emissions in Serbia could only grow up after that
Fig. 4. A Bell-Shaped Function (with r = t = 1 and s = 0). period, compared to the rest of the region.
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203 3197

VH H M L VL VH H M L VL VL L M H VH
1 1 1

0.8 0.8 0.8

Degree of membership
Degree of membership

Degree of membership
0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0 0 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Operator Costs Passenger Costs Local Environmental Status

Fig. 5. ANFIS membership functions after the training of adaptive neural network.

quality management it is very important to have access to informa-

tion on the existing air pollution levels and the air pollutants. For
that purpose, 40 automatic air quality monitoring stations have
been installed. In its annual reports on air quality in the Republic
of Serbia, the SEPA presents verified values and air quality evalua-
tions categorized by zones. The 2011 report says the highest green-
house gas emissions were reported in Belgrade, Novi Sad, Pancevo
and Smederevo. Further, car exhaust systems are the source of over
50% of greenhouse gasses. Table 5 shows the number of days in
2011 when the permitted concentration of car exhaust gasses
(lg/m3) was exceeded.
Acting upon the statistics, the authorities in Belgrade started to
Fig. 6. Training error results obtained using backpropagation algorithm.
buy green vehicles. The plan is for the City Transport Company to
buy a total of 180 green vehicles in the next two years, covering
In order to inform the public on the quality of air, the Serbian 25% of the bus fleet. After the purchase, however, the city author-
Environmental Protection Agency was established, presenting the ities will have to solve the problem of vehicle allocation to public
results of automatic air quality monitoring in real time. For air transportation routes. The model developed in this paper can be

Table 4
Test results for fitting capability of the ANFIS.

N.o. Relative error(0.984) Relative error (0.709) Relative error (0.319) Relative error (0.146) Relative error (0.090)
Measured Predicted Measured Predicted Measured Predicted Measured Predicted Measured Predicted
value value value value value value value value value value
1. 6.604 5.744 9.898 9.889 7.826 7.352 8.774 8.670 7.290 7.177
2. 7.899 6.717 9.603 9.217 6.550 6.469 9.969 9.967 8.075 7.948
3. 7.795 6.765 6.877 5.708 9.457 9.221 9.542 9.513 6.008 5.904
4. 6.019 5.309 6.941 6.462 6.994 6.362 4.607 4.497 6.878 6.777
5. 8.726 7.484 7.726 6.508 9.762 9.553 5.910 5.720 4.924 4.786
6. 9.479 7.986 7.954 6.894 7.444 6.838 7.415 7.199 6.761 6.666
7. 8.672 7.321 7.043 6.332 6.054 5.813 9.410 9.371 9.526 9.467
8. 6.165 5.396 9.012 8.564 7.454 7.537 7.202 6.961 5.332 5.186
9. 6.453 5.684 7.253 6.376 7.469 7.420 7.418 7.205 8.391 8.254
10. 5.545 4.893 9.136 8.622 7.491 6.944 6.675 6.450 6.826 6.741
11. 9.900 8.368 9.498 8.886 7.043 6.872 6.626 6.382 9.533 9.482
12. 9.762 8.221 8.114 7.419 9.787 9.660 6.480 6.238 6.657 6.557
13. 9.767 8.246 9.768 9.894 7.421 6.780 5.512 5.353 6.894 6.797
14. 7.180 6.172 7.139 5.776 9.883 9.865 5.395 5.268 6.404 6.296
15. 8.817 7.470 7.675 7.096 8.493 8.048 8.171 8.011 9.113 9.023
16. 7.484 6.415 9.917 9.888 6.400 6.284 6.648 6.431 7.655 7.542
17. 5.762 5.071 7.944 7.261 7.737 7.424 8.842 8.764 9.745 9.712
18. 9.855 8.328 7.609 6.545 7.856 7.750 9.384 9.342 7.232 7.130
19. 6.080 5.343 7.147 6.476 4.735 4.734 5.364 5.208 5.676 5.552
20. 9.489 7.987 9.031 8.520 9.890 9.795 7.114 6.883 5.149 4.996
21. 8.280 6.995 9.471 9.049 9.663 9.422 5.405 5.246 5.260 5.120
22. 6.353 5.597 5.954 4.882 7.229 6.970 5.645 5.491 9.513 9.452
23. 5.214 4.569 6.482 5.508 7.467 7.221 7.345 7.102 6.037 5.928
24. 9.819 8.302 9.966 10.000 6.076 5.844 8.979 8.905 9.834 9.813
25. 5.566 4.910 7.555 5.842 8.302 7.930 7.725 7.518 9.206 9.120
26. 8.507 7.206 6.993 6.316 6.349 6.331 9.600 9.572 9.242 9.158
27. 9.984 8.476 7.098 6.086 9.503 9.211 9.845 9.835 5.353 5.213
28. 6.921 6.013 8.519 8.440 9.649 9.457 7.009 6.759 9.199 9.112
29. 9.551 8.057 9.952 9.989 9.747 9.490 8.375 8.222 6.119 6.015
30. 6.604 5.368 6.263 5.167 6.844 6.327 7.471 7.226 7.038 6.943
3198 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

Table 5
Mean concentration (lg/m3), number of days in 2011 exceeding ultimate permitted levels.

N.o. Monitoring Station SO2(lg/m3) Soot(lg/m3) NO2(lg/m3) CO(lg/m3) O3(lg/m3)

⁄ ⁄ ⁄ ⁄ ⁄ ⁄ ⁄ ⁄
D C D C D C D C D⁄ C⁄
1. Belgrade-Slavija 12 230 32 174 37 459 29 13.5 21 105
2. Belgrade-Vračar 12 190 24 191 23 155 11 14.6 15 131
3. Belgrade-Centar 15 174 17 221 51 250 23 13.4 17 135
4. Belgrade-Mostar 31 190 33 179 31 142 29 12.8 14 142
5. Belgrade-Stari grad 35 165 21 213 14 136 17 10.6 27 183
6. Belgrade-Novi Beograd 27 213 23 201 22 130 13 10.2 31 159

C⁄ mean concentration (lg/m3) on the days of exceedance.

D⁄ days of exceedance.

used successfully to address the problem of green vehicle routing
in Belgrade.
In the next chapter, the proposed procedure has been imple-
mented on a test network simulating the conditions in the Belgrade
inner city. The parameters of the test network links (Table C1),
which were used to calculate ANFIS input variables (Operator Costs
(x1), Passenger Costs (x2) and Local Environmental Status (x3)), were
obtained based on the 2010–2013 ultimate values (SEA, 2013). Fig. 7
shows the test network, consisting of 36 nodes. The loads represent
the Euclidean distances between the links.
After the input network parameters were defined, a green vehi-
cle routing algorithm applies Table 6:
Step 1. Define IPs for all network links with an adaptive neural
network, and sort the links by the corresponding IPs in IP descend-
ing order (from the largest to the smallest IP), Table 6.
If two or more links have the same IP values, they should be in-
cluded in the list arbitrarily, one behind the other. In this example,
the link with the highest IP value is R26-33 (IP = 9.78), while the link
R1-7 has the lowest IP = 5.73.
Step 2. A maximum spanning tree is constructed by testing the
links in the order set out in Table 6. The first link is R26-33. The two
nodes do not belong to any component. We form the component A
composed of one link R26-33. The next link to be tested is R24-30. The
selection of the next link to be added to the component A involves
the following dilemmas:
a) Both nodes of the link belong to the same component;
b) One node of the link belongs to a component, and the other
does not;
c) Neither belongs to a component;
d) The nodes belong to different components.
If (a) applies, the link should not be included in the three, and
only Step 2 is repeated. If (b) is the case, the link is included in the
tree. The node that didn’t belong to a component is included in
the component the node on the other end of the link belongs to.
The case (c) – the link is included in the three and both its
nodes are allocated to an empty component. If (d) applies, the
link is included in the three, and the nodes from both components
are allocated to one component. In that case, the other
component remains empty. Fig. 8 shows the maximum spanning
tree Table 7.
 Step 3. Green line terminals are to be defined, and all combina-
tions of routes between the terminals identified. The routes are
then sorted in the IP descending order, compared to the sum
total of IPs. Fig. 8 shows the nodes representing the network
terminals (marked in red). The network loads represent IP val-
ues of the network links.
 Step 4. Routes are to be identified between all pairs of nodes
marked as terminals, and for each the sum IP value is to be
denoted; they are then sorted in IP descending order. Table 7
shows IP-sorted routes.
 Step 5. Allocate the vehicles to the routes. While allocating new
vehicles to the routes, three cases may occur:
a) The route to which a vehicle is allocated for the first time
does not coincide with any of the network routes (reduce
IP value by 15%),
b) The route to which a vehicle is allocated for the first time
coincides with a route to which a vehicle has been allocated
(reduce IP value by 10%),
c) The route to which a vehicle is allocated has at least one
vehicle allocated to it in the previous steps of the procedure
(reduce IP by 7% of the last recorded value).
The allocation of vehicles should start with the route with the
highest IP, and continue allocating until another route with the
highest IP occurs. The allocation of green vehicles should continue

165 305 275 190 350

1 7 13 19 25 31
545 460
370 200 185 190 230 320
375 155 465 390 420
2 8 14 20 26 32
320 500
250 230 360 270 300 390
430 270 240 320 295
3 9 15 21 27 33
310
425 260 195 230 175 280
330 405 515 365 310
4 10 16 22 28 34
380 205
530 230 290 320 275 280
225 270 170 145 410
5 11 17 23 29 35
355 400
450 205 185 350 150 325
175 510 285 495 315
6 12 18 24 30 36

Fig. 7. The architecture of green vehicle routing network.

 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203 3199

Table 6
Links sorted by IP descending order.

No. Link IP No. Link IP No. Link IP No. Link IP

1. R26–33 9.78 18. R30–36 8.56 35. R4–10 7.77 52. R22–28 7.02
2. R24–30 9.51 19. R27–33 8.47 36. R5–6 7.73 53. R11–12 6.93
3. R10–16 9.44 20. R25–31 8.45 37. R27–28 7.73 54. R7–13 6.89
4. R29–36 9.43 21. R34–35 8.44 38. R28–34 7.68 55. R23–24 6.76
5. R12–18 9.37 22. R13–19 8.43 39. R16–17 7.67 56. R9–10 6.71
6. R4–5 9.33 23. R3–9 8.31 40. R33–34 7.61 57. R19–25 6.65
7. R26–32 9.20 24. R26–27 8.28 41. R15–16 7.59 58. R8–15 6.56
8. R32–33 9.17 25. R7–8 8.18 42. R2–3 7.48 59. R31–32 6.56
9. R2–8 9.16 26. R15–21 8.17 43. R8–9 7.46 60. R29–30 6.37
10. R29–35 9.15 27. R21–22 8.12 44. R9–15 7.41 61. R17–18 6.29
11. R11–18 9.10 28. R16–22 8.1 45. R28–29 7.34 62. R5–11 6.03
12. R19–26 9.09 29. R3–4 8.08 46. R20–21 7.31 63. R23–29 6.02
13. R4–11 9.04 30. R15–22 8.03 47. R22–23 7.24 64. R8–14 6.00
14. R14–15 8.81 31. R22–29 7.98 48. R6–12 7.15 65. R13–14 5.99
15. R35–36 8.73 32. R11–17 7.87 49. R18–24 7.13 66. R19–20 5.85
16. R1–8 8.65 33. R14–20 7.83 50. R21–27 7.07 67. R17–23 5.84
17. R1–2 8.62 34. R25–26 7.80 51. R20–26 7.02 68. R10–11 5.82

8.43 8.45
1 7 13 19 25 31
8.65 9.09
8.18 7.80
9.16 7.83 9.20
2 8 14 20 26 32
9.78
7.48 8.81
8.31 8.17 8.47
3 9 15 21 27 33
8.08 8.12 7.73
7.77 9.44 8.10 7.68
4 10 16 22 28 34
9.04 7.98
9.33 7.24 8.44
7.87 9.15
5 11 17 23 29 35
9.10 9.43
7.73
9.37 9.51 8.56
6 12 18 24 30 36

Fig. 8. The maximum spanning tree with terminals.

Table 7
IP-sorted routes and number of allocated vehicles by the route.
P
Route No. Route IP Number of vehicles Corrected IP values
1. 1-8-2-3-4-10-16-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-19-13 135.43 3 99.56
2. 1-8-2-3-4-10-16-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-25-31 134.16 3 104.43
3. 12-18-11-4-10-16-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-19-13 129.57 3 100.86
4. 12-18-11-4-10-16-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-25-31 128.3 3 99.87
5. 20-14-15-21-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-19-13 109.68 3 85.38
6. 20-14-15-21-22-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-25-31 108.41 3 84.39
7. 24-30-36-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-19-13 96.27 2 80.58
8. 24-30-36-29-35-34-28-27-33-26-25-31 95.00 1 85.50
9. 1-8-2-3-4-10-16-22-29-36-30-24 94.16 1 84.74
10. 1-8-2-3-4-10-16-22-21-15-14-20 91.61 1 82.45
11. 12-18-11-4-10-16-22-29-36-30-24 88.30 1 79.47
12. 12-18-11-4-10-16-22-21-15-14-20 85.75 1 77.18
13. 20-14-15-21-22-29-36-30-24 68.41 0 68.41
14. 1-8-2-3-4-11-18-12 60.88 0 60.88
15. 13-19-26-25-31 33.77 0 33.77

until the green vehicle fleet is allocated. When all vehicles are allo-
cated to routes, the algorithm ends.
The assumption is that the green vehicle fleet is limited to 25
vehicles, and that no more than three (3) vehicles can be allocated
to a route. Under this assumption Step 5 applied, and the vehicles
were deployed. Table 7 shows the routes and the vehicles allocated
to the routes.
It is important to note that the algorithm suggests the green
vehicles should be distributed based on the input parameters,
without calculating the operation technology of the line. The
3200 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

Table A1
Training pairs (316 pairs of 750 pairs).

No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining

1. 0.76 0.17 0.57 8.27 80. 0.37 0.62 0.17 6.807 159. 0.75 0.68 0.89 9.732 238. 0.85 0.94 0.19 9.686
2. 0.69 0.73 0.32 9.086 81. 0.96 0.71 0.69 9.956 160. 0.88 0.38 0.93 9.59 239. 0.98 0.19 0.65 9.25
3. 0.19 0.15 0.98 5.828 82. 0.63 0.88 0.61 9.507 161. 0.48 0.18 0.83 7.186 240. 0.23 0.18 0.2 5.041
4. 0.44 0.35 0.58 7.232 83. 0.2 0.48 0.76 6.645 162. 0.95 0.98 0.22 9.876 241. 0.3 0.48 0.81 7.186
5. 0.83 0.19 0.85 8.962 84. 0.61 0.78 0.39 9.019 163. 0.63 0.53 0.92 9.159 242. 0.9 0.39 0.98 9.657
6. 0.96 0.37 0.46 9.45 85. 0.65 0.72 0.68 9.42 164. 0.42 0.66 0.9 8.433 243. 0.69 0.15 0.29 7.4
7. 0.76 0.87 0.93 9.869 86. 0.51 0.89 0.28 8.528 165. 0.95 0.47 0.9 9.846 244. 0.49 0.56 0.69 8.432
8. 0.35 0.53 0.65 7.525 87. 0.8 0.89 0.73 9.909 166. 0.43 0.72 0.57 8.353 245. 0.61 0.7 0.95 9.307
9. 0.15 0.52 0.72 6.548 88. 0.22 0.63 0.91 7.427 167. 0.55 0.35 0.52 7.773 246. 0.92 0.92 0.84 9.984
10. 0.77 0.19 0.33 8.021 89. 0.27 0.71 0.3 6.846 168. 0.58 0.76 0.98 9.287 247. 0.95 0.21 0.79 9.337
11. 0.39 0.88 0.69 8.76 90. 0.35 0.84 0.17 7.239 169. 0.33 0.38 0.5 6.643 248. 0.85 0.43 0.65 9.502
12. 0.34 0.6 0.28 6.913 91. 0.94 0.57 0.94 9.925 170. 0.42 0.65 0.7 8.318 249. 0.57 0.52 0.45 8.4
13. 0.72 0.31 0.45 8.389 92. 0.62 0.57 0.77 9.135 171. 0.44 0.78 0.22 7.815 250. 0.95 0.92 0.44 9.945
14. 0.44 0.16 0.3 6.09 93. 0.78 0.21 0.52 8.424 172. 0.84 0.53 0.93 9.784 251. 0.38 0.19 0.75 6.519
15. 0.93 0.36 0.3 9.084 94. 0.48 0.88 0.94 9.226 173. 0.33 0.26 0.62 6.275 252. 0.95 0.32 0.37 9.178
16. 0.65 0.48 0.54 8.787 95. 0.52 0.72 0.78 8.96 174. 0.71 0.2 0.52 8.031 253. 0.82 0.67 0.69 9.812
17. 0.45 0.25 0.83 7.236 96. 0.62 0.55 0.63 8.981 175. 0.61 0.88 0.66 9.499 254. 0.44 0.85 0.91 9.009
18. 0.73 0.85 0.22 9.252 97. 0.82 0.97 0.28 9.734 176. 0.26 0.34 0.2 5.6 255. 0.34 0.88 0.9 8.684
19. 0.85 0.2 0.92 9.094 98. 0.97 0.88 0.15 9.771 177. 0.85 0.97 0.36 9.838 256. 0.69 0.84 0.39 9.398
20. 0.44 0.82 0.39 8.258 99. 0.29 0.32 0.84 6.571 178. 0.55 0.68 0.59 8.877 257. 0.21 0.21 0.24 5.114
21. 0.97 0.78 0.59 9.958 100. 0.31 0.69 0.46 7.397 179. 0.27 0.67 0.23 6.571 258. 0.94 0.21 0.16 8.33
22. 0.24 0.72 0.56 7.369 101. 0.44 0.42 0.43 7.335 180. 0.67 0.94 0.65 9.713 259. 0.9 0.61 0.52 9.729
23. 0.55 0.39 0.72 8.213 102. 0.45 0.47 0.88 8.068 181. 0.88 0.48 0.31 9.202 260. 0.29 0.76 0.53 7.643
24. 0.96 0.18 0.23 8.472 103. 0.3 0.41 0.43 6.498 182. 0.15 0.96 0.52 7.421 261. 0.31 0.7 0.69 7.947
25. 0.94 0.46 0.65 9.735 104. 0.31 0.18 0.8 6.206 183. 0.78 0.84 0.47 9.737 262. 0.21 0.89 0.98 8.069
26. 0.53 0.67 0.78 8.906 105. 0.67 0.53 0.7 9.221 184. 0.6 0.21 0.48 7.381 0.23 0.26 0.72 5.93
27. 0.18 0.49 0.19 5.602 106. 0.94 0.76 0.65 9.953 185. 0.3 0.2 0.3 5.544 264. 0.64 0.31 0.48 8.023
28. 0.47 0.21 0.53 6.709 107. 0.57 0.38 0.93 8.494 186. 0.53 0.54 0.28 7.812 265. 0.79 0.89 0.67 9.886
29. 0.48 0.2 0.21 6.308 108. 0.98 0.23 0.91 9.513 187. 0.74 0.25 0.27 8.007 266. 0.22 0.53 0.95 7.032
30. 0.56 0.77 0.95 9.234 109. 0.54 0.82 0.32 8.644 188. 0.83 0.93 0.77 9.95 267. 0.78 0.49 0.86 9.59
31. 0.58 0.27 0.33 7.316 110. 0.3 0.28 0.72 6.328 189. 0.9 0.49 0.63 9.692 268. 0.55 0.95 0.75 9.532
32. 0.21 0.8 0.41 7.022 111. 0.77 0.75 0.8 9.807 190. 0.87 0.36 0.21 8.701 269. 0.68 0.73 0.49 9.364
33. 0.43 0.85 0.93 8.975 112. 0.5 0.71 0.9 8.883 191. 0.58 0.53 0.75 8.856 270. 0.38 0.76 0.58 8.218
34. 0.15 0.27 0.97 5.941 113. 0.27 0.81 0.93 8.232 192. 0.38 0.19 0.31 5.901 271. 0.67 0.43 0.47 8.592
35. 0.24 0.72 0.55 7.34 114. 0.52 0.62 0.92 8.798 193. 0.8 0.81 0.65 9.854 272. 0.65 0.41 0.95 8.971
36. 0.31 0.26 0.31 5.804 115. 0.6 0.76 0.7 9.305 194. 0.95 0.82 0.26 9.75 273. 0.25 0.88 0.63 8.01
37. 0.7 0.37 0.62 8.763 116. 0.31 0.61 0.58 7.46 195. 0.36 0.37 0.28 6.355 274. 0.89 0.33 0.15 8.503
38. 0.54 0.24 0.78 7.633 117. 0.25 0.44 0.21 5.831 196. 0.37 0.38 0.16 6.115 275. 0.88 0.64 0.23 9.323
39. 0.82 0.39 0.83 9.447 118. 0.87 0.97 0.37 9.868 197. 0.63 0.67 0.43 8.978 276. 0.9 0.58 0.94 9.901
40. 0.72 0.6 0.41 9.107 119. 0.44 0.43 0.7 7.723 198. 0.71 0.83 0.74 9.736 277. 0.71 0.64 0.44 9.221
41. 0.64 0.17 0.77 7.97 120. 0.28 0.39 0.37 6.211 199. 0.88 0.48 0.24 9.077 278. 0.83 0.87 0.45 9.823
42. 0.37 0.72 0.83 8.382 121. 0.77 0.63 0.9 9.745 200. 0.56 0.41 0.43 7.936 279. 0.29 0.42 0.71 6.814
43. 0.23 0.39 0.48 6.145 122. 0.77 0.76 0.41 9.554 201. 0.42 0.64 0.48 7.97 280. 0.45 0.38 0.55 7.396
44. 0.21 0.52 0.84 6.902 123. 0.81 0.2 0.7 8.785 202. 0.45 0.89 0.42 8.478 281. 0.24 0.97 0.29 7.183
45. 0.84 0.65 0.77 9.857 124. 0.25 0.86 0.5 7.63 203. 0.38 0.85 0.97 8.788 282. 0.7 0.29 0.81 8.678
46. 0.32 0.47 0.72 7.193 125. 0.17 0.16 0.77 5.507 204. 0.41 0.82 0.85 8.812 283. 0.54 0.84 0.77 9.286
47. 0.73 0.77 0.39 9.428 126. 0.93 0.81 0.75 9.972 205. 0.73 0.26 0.94 8.804 284. 0.16 0.78 0.16 6.09
48. 0.96 0.52 0.3 9.472 127. 0.7 0.53 0.24 8.482 206. 0.31 0.59 0.83 7.673 285. 0.81 0.87 0.91 9.921
49. 0.3 0.18 0.86 6.248 128. 0.89 0.77 0.62 9.919 207. 0.93 0.37 0.27 9.046 286. 0.46 0.72 0.47 8.335
50. 0.26 0.39 0.68 6.505 129. 0.72 0.76 0.82 9.711 208. 0.46 0.5 0.44 7.761 287. 0.97 0.55 0.5 9.749
51. 0.86 0.29 0.83 9.292 130. 0.25 0.79 0.47 7.355 209. 0.43 0.23 0.54 6.581 288. 0.37 0.74 0.51 7.962
52. 0.81 0.54 0.49 9.387 131. 0.21 0.61 0.41 6.557 210. 0.98 0.21 0.57 9.232 289. 0.85 0.54 0.98 9.813
53. 0.4 0.68 0.17 7.155 132. 0.36 0.85 0.35 7.786 211. 0.62 0.28 0.23 7.393 290. 0.38 0.48 0.17 6.464
54. 0.4 0.25 0.24 6.102 133. 0.4 0.4 0.39 6.941 212. 0.88 0.84 0.63 9.939 291. 0.28 0.87 0.7 8.264
55. 0.72 0.23 0.95 8.688 134. 0.82 0.8 0.3 9.536 213. 0.29 0.48 0.68 7.032 292. 0.87 0.85 0.47 9.875
56. 0.55 0.38 0.51 7.894 135. 0.61 0.23 0.67 7.831 214. 0.19 0.16 0.49 5.127 293. 0.87 0.66 0.85 9.908
57. 0.46 0.22 0.54 6.708 136. 0.56 0.62 0.45 8.61 215. 0.85 0.3 0.74 9.243 294. 0.47 0.54 0.66 8.245
58. 0.71 0.81 0.8 9.729 137. 0.28 0.77 0.85 8.164 216. 0.22 0.91 0.9 8.14 295. 0.38 0.95 0.29 7.909
59. 0.88 0.46 0.81 9.725 138. 0.68 0.77 0.87 9.62 217. 0.48 0.47 0.77 8.166 296. 0.43 0.59 0.36 7.646
60. 0.71 0.69 0.67 9.574 139. 0.16 0.81 0.46 6.941 218. 0.58 0.95 0.97 9.659 297. 0.9 0.35 0.4 9.152
61. 0.88 0.71 0.88 9.934 140. 0.26 0.76 0.66 7.839 219. 0.2 0.7 0.72 7.481 298. 0.32 0.34 0.22 5.922
62. 0.19 0.85 0.21 6.496 141. 0.49 0.25 0.58 7.063 220. 0.41 0.87 0.2 7.756 299. 0.92 0.38 0.5 9.41
63. 0.57 0.82 0.83 9.358 142. 0.52 0.63 0.49 8.509 221. 0.71 0.67 0.89 9.62 300. 0.71 0.72 0.71 9.625
64. 0.93 0.73 0.26 9.615 143. 0.29 0.44 0.84 6.999 222. 0.76 0.42 0.34 8.703 301. 0.48 0.65 0.15 7.452
65. 0.5 0.18 0.3 6.481 144. 0.25 0.72 0.32 6.808 223. 0.67 0.89 0.18 9.069 302. 0.86 0.66 0.96 9.904
66. 0.59 0.84 0.44 9.092 145. 0.29 0.77 0.53 7.669 224. 0.89 0.39 0.28 8.999 303. 0.56 0.53 0.76 8.763
67. 0.97 0.24 0.95 9.526 146. 0.84 0.35 0.52 9.115 225. 0.67 0.74 0.88 9.56 304. 0.3 0.35 0.46 6.304
68. 0.5 0.76 0.95 8.997 147. 0.24 0.82 0.39 7.173 226. 0.22 0.37 0.74 6.288 305. 0.21 0.25 0.71 5.8
69. 0.74 0.52 0.18 8.496 148. 0.18 0.44 0.88 6.475 227. 0.77 0.19 0.53 8.319 306. 0.28 0.41 0.7 6.71
70. 0.59 0.68 0.75 9.167 149. 0.68 0.95 0.87 9.828 228. 0.58 0.15 0.89 7.746 307. 0.88 0.42 0.53 9.41
71. 0.74 0.18 0.67 8.379 150. 0.68 0.28 0.48 8.118 229. 0.62 0.83 0.81 9.524 308. 0.59 0.53 0.29 8.109
72. 0.98 0.44 0.79 9.827 151. 0.33 0.28 0.21 5.782 230. 0.71 0.85 0.27 9.274 309. 0.68 0.66 0.9 9.517
73. 0.3 0.79 0.51 7.717 152. 0.79 0.59 0.29 9.067 231. 0.8 0.65 0.58 9.671 310. 0.87 0.72 0.96 9.93
74. 0.19 0.95 0.48 7.511 153. 0.3 0.39 0.47 6.482 232. 0.31 0.41 0.32 6.317 311. 0.2 0.54 0.27 6.008
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203 3201

Table A1 (continued)

No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining No. x1 x2 x3 ftraining

75. 0.62 0.21 0.98 8.224 154. 0.79 0.89 0.42 9.743 233. 0.19 0.64 0.97 7.333 312. 0.45 0.79 0.92 8.889
76. 0.85 0.26 0.35 8.647 155. 0.31 0.86 0.17 7.034 234. 0.21 0.4 0.16 5.435 313. 0.58 0.87 0.25 8.779
77. 0.27 0.28 0.69 6.14 156. 0.6 0.32 0.2 7.324 235. 0.58 0.42 0.91 8.653 314. 0.85 0.59 0.32 9.313
78. 0.5 0.36 0.49 7.505 157. 0.58 0.31 0.38 7.55 236. 0.24 0.93 0.6 7.994 315. 0.9 0.57 0.79 9.877
79. 0.74 0.33 0.56 8.711 158. 0.29 0.27 0.55 6.024 237. 0.3 0.38 0.57 6.559 316. 0.93 0.81 0.64 9.96

(A)
8
8
7 8 7.5

7 7
6
6.5
5 6
6
4 5 5.5

4 1
1 1 1
0.6 0.8 1 0.8 0.5 0.8
1
0.5 0.4 0.6 Local
0.2 Local 0.4 0.5 0.6
Operator Costs 0 0 0.2 Environmental Operator Costs 0.4 Passenger Costs
Environmental Passenger Costs 0 0 0.2
Status 0 0
Status

(B) 9.5
9
9 9 8.5
8 8 8
7
7 7.5
6
6 7
5
5 6.5
1 1 6
1 1
0.8 0.8 1
0.5 0.6 0.5 0.6 1
0.4 0.4 0.5 0.8
Operator Costs 0.2 Local Environmental 0.2 Local 0.2 0.4 0.6
0 0 Passenger 0 0 Operator Costs 0 0
Status Environmental Passenger Costs
Costs
Status

Fig. B1. Sensitivity of ANFIS - (A) before the training of the model (B) after the training of the model.

Table C1
Characteristics of the links within the tested network.

N.o. Link SO2 CO NOx Lb Fžs Li Ch Tpb Fto Cu Qij Tv Tp Ftp IP

1. R1–2 55.11 9.48 39.74 94.22 0.79 370 85.1 7.4 0.38 0.56 0.37 7.4 0.1 0.28 8.62
2. R1–7 45.09 6.24 51.09 54.93 0.46 165 37.95 3.3 0.17 0.25 0.17 3.3 0.03 0.02 5.73
3. R1–8 25.05 7.52 39.74 60.95 0.51 545 125.35 10.9 0.57 0.82 0.55 10.9 0.21 0.9 8.65
4. R2–8 110.22 7.14 68.12 113.87 0.94 375 86.25 7.5 0.39 0.56 0.38 7.5 0.19 0.29 9.16
5. R2–3 120.24 7.02 39.74 87.14 0.73 250 57.5 5 0.26 0.38 0.25 5 0.1 0.09 7.48
6. R3–4 75.15 7.06 79.47 67.88 0.57 425 97.75 8.5 0.44 0.64 0.43 8.5 0.07 0.42 8.08
7. R3–9 55.11 7.22 73.8 72.45 0.61 430 98.9 8.6 0.44 0.65 0.43 8.6 0.13 0.44 8.31
8. R4–5 75.15 6.78 73.8 80.18 0.67 530 121.9 10.6 0.55 0.8 0.53 10.6 0.04 0.82 9.33
9. R4–10 45.09 7.3 68.12 80.18 0.67 330 75.9 6.6 0.34 0.5 0.33 6.6 0.24 0.2 7.77
10. R4–11 20.04 9.16 68.12 106.69 0.89 380 87.4 7.6 0.39 0.57 0.38 7.6 0.03 0.3 9.04
11. R5–6 85.17 7.92 45.41 53.27 0.45 450 103.5 9 0.47 0.68 0.45 9 0.2 0.51 7.73
12. R5–11 125.25 6.2 51.09 56.78 0.48 225 51.75 4.5 0.23 0.34 0.23 4.5 0.14 0.06 6.03
13. R6–12 10.02 8.92 34.06 88.48 0.74 175 40.25 3.5 0.18 0.26 0.18 3.5 0.01 0.03 7.15
14. R7–8 100.2 9.92 39.74 117.17 0.98 200 46 4 0.2 0.3 0.2 4 0.19 0.05 8.18
15. R7–13 50.1 9 34.06 65.47 0.55 305 70.15 6.1 0.31 0.46 0.31 6.1 0.24 0.16 6.89
16. R8–9 110.22 8.34 39.74 90.33 0.75 230 52.9 4.6 0.24 0.35 0.23 4.6 0.15 0.07 7.46
17. R8–14 95.19 9.58 85.15 61.38 0.52 155 35.65 3.1 0.16 0.23 0.16 3.1 0.02 0.02 6
18. R8–15 45.09 9.62 34.06 55 0.47 320 73.6 6.4 0.33 0.48 0.32 6.4 0.09 0.18 6.56
19. R9–10 90.18 7.84 51.09 68.28 0.57 260 59.8 5.2 0.27 0.39 0.26 5.2 0.19 0.1 6.71
20. R9–15 70.14 9.62 45.41 81.42 0.69 270 62.1 5.4 0.28 0.41 0.27 5.4 0.13 0.11 7.41
21. R10–11 90.18 7.34 51.09 50.92 0.43 230 52.9 4.6 0.24 0.35 0.23 4.6 0.11 0.07 5.82
22. R10–16 45.09 9.3 39.74 116.92 0.97 405 93.15 8.1 0.42 0.61 0.41 8.1 0.1 0.37 9.44
23. R11–12 40.08 9.28 68.12 79.36 0.67 205 47.15 4.1 0.21 0.31 0.21 4.1 0.22 0.05 6.93

(continued on next page)

3202 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203

Table C1 (continued)
N.o. Link SO2 CO NOx Lb Fžs Li Ch Tpb Fto Cu Qij Tv Tp Ftp IP
24. R11–17 95.19 9.36 73.8 94.17 0.79 270 62.1 5.4 0.28 0.41 0.27 5.4 0.17 0.11 7.87
25. R11–18 105.21 7.56 62.44 117.37 0.97 355 81.65 7.1 0.37 0.53 0.36 7.1 0.12 0.25 9.1
26. R12–18 110.22 9 39.74 83.29 0.7 510 117.3 10.2 0.53 0.77 0.51 10.2 0.22 0.74 9.37
27. R13–14 55.11 7.56 51.09 59.08 0.5 185 42.55 3.7 0.19 0.28 0.19 3.7 0.1 0.04 5.99
28. R13–19 85.17 8.44 45.41 115.64 0.96 275 63.25 5.5 0.28 0.41 0.28 5.5 0.07 0.11 8.43
29. R14–15 90.18 7.46 68.12 103.27 0.86 360 82.8 7.2 0.37 0.54 0.36 7.2 0.02 0.26 8.81
30. R14–20 75.15 9.54 56.77 51.79 0.45 465 106.95 9.3 0.48 0.7 0.47 9.3 0.14 0.56 7.83
31. R15–16 85.17 6.1 45.41 99.38 0.82 195 44.85 3.9 0.2 0.29 0.2 3.9 0.13 0.04 7.59
32. R15–21 105.21 9.84 39.74 110 0.92 240 55.2 4.8 0.25 0.36 0.24 4.8 0.12 0.08 8.17
33. R15–22 50.1 8.82 51.09 90.88 0.76 310 71.3 6.2 0.32 0.47 0.31 6.2 0.07 0.16 8.03
34. R16–17 30.06 8.12 73.8 84.64 0.71 290 66.7 5.8 0.3 0.44 0.29 5.8 0.1 0.14 7.67
35. R16–22 115.23 6.34 51.09 50.34 0.43 515 118.45 10.3 0.54 0.77 0.52 10.3 0.16 0.76 8.1
36. R17–18 90.18 6.34 68.12 66.34 0.56 185 42.55 3.7 0.19 0.28 0.19 3.7 0.16 0.04 6.29
37. R17–23 100.2 6.12 34.06 56.95 0.48 170 39.1 3.4 0.17 0.26 0.17 3.4 0.24 0.03 5.84
38. R18–24 115.23 8.22 45.41 73.78 0.62 285 65.55 5.7 0.29 0.43 0.29 5.7 0.03 0.13 7.13
39. R19–20 10.02 9.18 51.09 55.4 0.47 190 43.7 3.8 0.19 0.29 0.19 3.8 0.22 0.04 5.85
40. R19–25 110.22 9.12 79.47 74.76 0.63 190 43.7 3.8 0.19 0.29 0.19 3.8 0.19 0.04 6.65
41. R19–26 105.21 8.18 85.15 86.87 0.73 460 105.8 9.2 0.48 0.69 0.46 9.2 0.15 0.54 9.09
42. R20–21 70.14 9.54 34.06 79.01 0.67 270 62.1 5.4 0.28 0.41 0.27 5.4 0.23 0.11 7.31
43. R20–26 95.19 9.48 45.41 51.59 0.44 390 89.7 7.8 0.4 0.59 0.39 7.8 0.04 0.33 7.02
44. R21–22 100.2 6.78 73.8 110.69 0.92 230 52.9 4.6 0.24 0.35 0.23 4.6 0.11 0.07 8.12
45. R21–27 70.14 7.6 45.41 66.36 0.56 320 73.6 6.4 0.33 0.48 0.32 6.4 0.17 0.18 7.07
46. R22–23 15.03 7.5 51.09 70.34 0.59 320 73.6 6.4 0.33 0.48 0.32 6.4 0.15 0.18 7.24
47. R22–28 115.23 7.44 68.12 56.75 0.48 365 83.95 7.3 0.38 0.55 0.37 7.3 0.07 0.27 7.02
48. R22–29 95.19 6.18 34.06 110.36 0.91 205 47.15 4.1 0.21 0.31 0.21 4.1 0.11 0.05 7.98
49. R23–24 30.06 9.9 45.41 52.99 0.46 350 80.5 7 0.36 0.53 0.35 7 0.18 0.24 6.76
50. R23–29 115.23 9.7 56.77 61.96 0.53 145 33.35 2.9 0.15 0.22 0.15 2.9 0.04 0.02 6.02
51. R24–30 120.24 9.76 56.77 93.2 0.78 495 113.85 9.9 0.51 0.74 0.5 9.9 0.12 0.67 9.51
52. R25–26 50.1 9.36 79.47 99.57 0.83 230 52.9 4.6 0.24 0.35 0.23 4.6 0.18 0.07 7.8
53. R25–31 55.11 6.12 68.12 93.66 0.78 350 80.5 7 0.36 0.53 0.35 7 0.17 0.24 8.45
54. R26–27 70.14 6.54 56.77 101.49 0.84 300 69 6 0.31 0.45 0.3 6 0.24 0.15 8.28
55. R26–32 125.25 9.82 73.8 102.17 0.86 420 96.6 8.4 0.43 0.63 0.42 8.4 0.05 0.41 9.2
56. R26–33 120.24 9.04 39.74 108.55 0.9 500 115 10 0.52 0.75 0.5 10 0.12 0.69 9.78
57. R27–28 90.18 9.9 79.47 104.49 0.87 175 40.25 3.5 0.18 0.26 0.18 3.5 0.16 0.03 7.73
58. R27–33 95.19 6.62 56.77 111.4 0.92 295 67.85 5.9 0.3 0.44 0.3 5.9 0.1 0.14 8.47
59. R28–29 125.25 7.96 51.09 79.42 0.67 275 63.25 5.5 0.28 0.41 0.28 5.5 0.24 0.12 7.34
60. R28–34 70.14 7.54 51.09 81.95 0.68 310 71.3 6.2 0.32 0.47 0.31 6.2 0.18 0.17 7.68
61. R29–30 115.23 6.54 79.47 71.2 0.6 150 34.5 3 0.15 0.23 0.15 3 0.06 0.02 6.37
62. R29–35 80.16 6.02 51.09 104.41 0.86 410 94.3 8.2 0.42 0.62 0.41 8.2 0.22 0.39 9.15
63. R29–36 15.03 7.12 39.74 119.89 0.99 400 92 8 0.41 0.6 0.4 8 0.06 0.35 9.43
64. R30–36 60.12 8.5 34.06 108.04 0.9 315 72.45 6.3 0.32 0.47 0.32 6.3 0.07 0.17 8.56
65. R31–32 105.21 7.38 39.74 55.51 0.47 320 73.6 6.4 0.33 0.48 0.32 6.4 0.17 0.18 6.56
66. R32–33 90.18 9.66 45.41 108.78 0.91 390 89.7 7.8 0.4 0.59 0.39 7.8 0.1 0.33 9.17
67. R33–34 40.08 6.64 79.47 98.44 0.82 200 46 4 0.2 0.3 0.2 4 0.13 0.05 7.61
68. R34–35 100.2 7.24 68.12 113.83 0.94 280 64.4 5.6 0.29 0.42 0.28 5.6 0.08 0.12 8.44
69. R35–36 35.07 7.72 79.47 111.93 0.93 325 74.75 6.5 0.33 0.49 0.33 6.5 0.12 0.19 8.73

number of vehicles needed for a line to be efficient should include
traditional vehicles if required.
4. Conclusion
For the states that have entered the era of ecological enlighten-
ment, the future has begun - the biofuels like biogas, biomethane
and natural gas are already replacing the classic fossil fuel. Follow-
ing the latest trends, this study has developed a model for the opti-
misation of a green vehicle fleet implementation within the
existing street network to reduce air pollution, noise levels, opera-
tor and user costs. Based on their policy, the city authorities define
the priorities of green vehicle routing in the traffic network, choos-
ing if and to what degree it matters more to improve the quality of
the environment or reduce the costs to be borne by operators and
users.
The criteria to model the user/operator costs have been shaped
by the listed literature and logic indicators of the given variables,
including the cost of work and the average passenger costs within
the network. The criteria related to the quality of the environment
involve the substances that are the by-products of public transport
vehicles, detrimental to the health of people and animals, and the
noise levels that have an impact on the general health and quality
of life.
It is also important that in the test example the values of input
parameters to define the link IPs mirror closely the conditions in
downtown Belgrade. The size of the fleet reflects the number of
green vehicles the Belgrade City Transport Company owns. The
algorithm supports any number of available vehicles correspond-
ing with the size of the network and transport demand.
A generic model has been proposed for green bus routing, which
can be used in the cities facing the problem of green vehicle distribu-
tion in a passenger public transport network. One of the advantages
of this model is that it takes into account the uncertainties occurring
in predicting the operator/passenger costs and environmental
parameters in a public transport network. Besides, the model allows
for planning the vehicle routes with the maximum of positive envi-
ronmental effects, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and
a better air quality in most densely populated areas.
The paper demonstrates only a segment of operational research
techniques that can be implemented in road transport. If there is
an optimisation problem inherent to the transport sector, opera-
tional research techniques are clearly emerging as vital.
 A.D. Jovanović et al. / Expert Systems with Applications 41 (2014) 3189–3203
Future research should focus on optimal distribution of green
and traditional vehicles based on defined criteria, where heuristic
and meta-heuristic methods can certainly apply. Such a problem
would be very good to analyse by genetic algorithms or another
appropriate model.
According to the research available to the authors, it is still un-
clear if power supply stations for green buses might alter the sug-
gested routes. The increasing popular idea is that electric buses
should be included in the public transportation fleets. Any relevant
research and addition to this model should examine the potential
of power supply stations for these buses, and define the most opti-
mal locations for battery charging points along the routes. Along
with neuro-fuzzy modelling, a mass service system might be a
good technique to address this problem.
Appendix A
See Table A1.
Appendix B
See Fig. B1.
Appendix C
See Table C1.
References
Baaj, M. H., & Mahmassani, H. S. (1995). Hybrid route generation heuristic algorithm
for the design of transit networks. Transportation Research Part C, 3(1), 31–50.
Bauer, J., Bektas, T., & Crainic, T. G. (2010). Minimizing greenhouse gas emissions in
intermodal freight transport: an application to rail service design. Journal of the
Operational Research Society, 61, 530–542.
Bektas, T., & Laporte, G. (2011). The pollution-routing problem. Transportation
Research Part B, 45, 1232–1250.
Beltran, B., Carrese, S., Cipriani, E., & Petreli, M. (2009). Transit network design with
allocation of green vehicles: A genetic algorithm approach. Transportation
Research Part C, 17(5), 475–483.
Carrese, S., & Gori, S. (2004). An urban bus network design procedure. Transportation
Planning, 64, 177–196.
Cipriani, E., Fusco, G., & Petrelli, M. (2006). A multimodal transit network design
procedure for urban areas. Transportation Research Board, 10, 5–20.
Dantzig, G. B., & Ramser, J. H. (1959). The truck dispatching problem. Management
Science, 6(1), 80–91.
Demir, E., Bektas, T., & Laporte, G. (2012). An adaptive large neighborhood search
heuristic for the pollution-routing problem. European Journal of Operational
Research, 223, 346–359.
Erdogan, S., & Miller-Hooks, E. (2012). A green vehicle routing problem.
Transportation Research Part E, 48(1), 100–114.
European Environment Agency (EEA) (2013). The impact of international shipping
on European air quality and climate forcing, Copenhagen, European
Environment Agency.
European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients’ Associations (EFA).
(2011). EFA Book on Respiratory Allergy in Europe: Relieve the Burden, EFA.
Fagerholt, K., Laporte, G., & Norstad, I. (2010). Reducing fuel emissions by
optimizing speed on shipping routes. Journal of the Operational Research
Society, 61, 523–529.
Fan, W., & Machemehl, R. B. (2006). Optimal transit route network design problem
with variable transit demand: genetic algorithm approach. Journal of
Transportation Engineering, 132(1), 40–51.
Faulin, J., Juan, A., Lera, F., & Grasman, S. (2011). Solving the capacitated vehicle
routing problem with environmental criteria based on real estimations in road
transportation: A case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20,
323–334.
Fusco, G., Gori, S., & Petrelli, M. (2002). A heuristic transit network design algorithm
for medium size towns. 9th Euro working group on transportation. Bari, 2002,
652–656.
Jang, J. S. R. (1993). ANFIS: Adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 23, 665–685.
3203
Kuo, Y. (2010). Using simulated annealing to minimize fuel consumption for the
time-dependent vehicle routing problem. Computers & Industrial Engineering,
59(1), 157–165.
Lin, C., Choy, K.L., Ho, G.T.S., Chung, S.H. and Lam, H.Y. (2013). Survey of green
vehicle routing problem: past and future trends. Expert Systems with
Applications, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2013.07.107.
Maden, W., Eglese, R., & Black, D. (2010). Vehicle routing and scheduling with
timevarying data: A case study. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61,
515–522.
Marinakis, Y. (2012). Multiple phase neighborhood search-GRASP for the
capacitated vehicle routing problem. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(8),
6807–6815.
McKinnon, A. (2007). CO2 Emissions from freight transport in the UK. Technical
Report. Prepared for the Climate Change Working Group of the Commission for
Integrated Transport, London, UK.
Mu, Q. and Eglese, R. W. (2011). Disrupted capacitated vehicle routing problem with
order release delay. Annals of Operations Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s10479-011-0947-7.
Muyldermans, L., & Pang, G. (2010). On the benefits of co-collection: Experiments
with a multi-compartment vehicle routing algorithm. European Journal of
Operational Research, 206(1), 93–103.
Ngamchai, S., & Lovell, D. J. (2003). Optimal time transfer in bus transit route
network design using a genetic algorithm. Journal of Transportation Engineering,
129(5), 510–521.
Nguyen, P. K., Crainic, T. G., & Toulouse, M. (2013). A tabu search for time-
dependent multi-zone multi-trip vehicle routing problem with time windows.
European Journal of Operational Research, 231(1), 43–56.
Palmer, A. (2007). The Development of an integrated routing and carbon dioxide
emissions model for goods vehicles. Ph.D. thesis, Cranfield University, School of
Management.
Pang, K. W. (2011). An adaptive parallel route construction heuristic for the vehicle
routing problem with time windows constraints. Expert Systems with
Applications, 38(9), 11939–11946.
Pronello, C. and André, M. (2000). Pollutant emissions estimation in road transport
models. INRETS-LTE Report.
Sbihi, A. and Eglese, R. W. (2007). The relationship between vehicle routing and
scheduling and green logistics–a literature survey. Lancaster University
Management School Working Paper.
Schreyer, C., Schneider, C., Maibach, M., Rothengatter, W., Doll, C., & Schmedding, D.
(2004). External costs of transport. Zurich/Karlsruhe: Update study.
Serbian Department of Energy (SDE). (2013). The Alternative Fuels and Advanced
Vehicles Data Center. <http://www.afdc.energy.gov.rs/afdc/locator/stations/
state> (accessed 24.02.13).
Serbian Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). (2012). Environment in Serbia,
Serbian environment agency, Belgrade, Serbia.
Serbian Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). (2013). National network for
monitoring air quality. Serbian Environment Agency, Serbia.
Shang, F., & Xu, L. (1996). A hybrid knowledge-based system for urban
development. Expert Systems with Applications, 10(1), 157–163.
Shi, Y., & Mizumoto, M. (2000). A new approach of neuro-fuzzy learning algorithm
for tuning fuzzy rules. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 112(1), 99–116.
Shing, J., & Jang, R. (1993). ANFIS: Adaptive network - based fuzzy inference system.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 23(3), 665–685.
Shing, J., & Jang, R. (1995). Neuro - fuzzy modeling and control. The Proceeding of the
IEEE, 83(3), 378–406.
Stenger, A., Vigo, D., Enz, S., & Schwind, M. (2013). An adaptive variable
neighborhood search algorithm for a vehicle routing problem arising in small
package shipping. Transportation Science, 47(1), 64–80.
Suzuki, Y. (2011). A new truck-routing approach for reducing fuel consumption and
pollutants emission. Transportation Research Part D, 16(1), 73–77.
Tao, Y., & Xinmiao, Y. (1998). Fuzzy comprehensive assessment, fuzzy clustering
analysis and its application for urban traffic environment quality evaluation.
Transportation Research Part D, 3(1), 51–57.
Tasan, A. S., & Gen, M. (2012). A genetic algorithm based approach to vehicle routing
problem with simultaneous pick-up and deliveries. Computer & Industrial
Engineering, 62(3), 755–761.
Ubeda, S., Arcelus, F. J., & Faulin, J. (2011). Green logistics at Eroski: A case study.
International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 44–51.
Vidal, T., Crainic, T. G., Gendreau, M., & Prins, C. (2013). A hybrid genetic algorithm
with adaptive diversity management for a large class of vehicle routing
problems with time-windows. Computers & Operations Research, 40(1),
475–489.
Xiao, Y., Zhao, Q., Kaku, I., & Xu, Y. (2011). Development of a fuel consumption
optimization model for the capacitated vehicle routing problem. Computers and
Operations Research, 39(7), 1419–1431.
Zimmermann, H. J. (2000). An application – oriented view of modelling uncertainty.
European Journal of Operational Research, 122(2), 190–198.