资料

INFORMATION

Article
文章

A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Community

Environment Adaptability for Elderly People
Based on the Improved TOPSIS
基于改进 TOPSIS 法的老年人社区环境适应性综合评
价
1 2 2 3 4,
Shen-Cheng Zhang , Hui Wang , Zhi Liu , Shouzhen Zeng , Yun Jin *
5,
and Tomas Baležentis *
沈成章 1，慧王 2，智刘 2，守贞增 3，云进 4，* 和托马斯贝尔恩蒂斯 5，*
1
School of Arts, Anhui Polytechnic University, Wuhu 241000, China; cheng18255387165@163.com
安徽理工大学艺术学院，芜湖 241000; cheng18255387165@163. com
2
School of Management Engineering, Anhui Polytechnic University, Wuhu 241000, China;
安徽理工大学管理工程学院，芜湖 241000，中国;
m18715121334@163.com (H.W.); liuzhi0551@126.com (Z.L.)
M18715121334@163. com (h.w.) ; liuzhi0551@126. com (z.l.)
3
School of Business, Ningbo University, Ningbo 315211, China; zszzxl@163.com
宁波大学商学院，宁波 315211，中国; zszzxl@163. com
4
Wuxi Vocational College of Science and Technology, Wuxi 214028, China
无锡科技职业学院，无锡 214028
5
Lithuanian Institute of Agrarian Economics, 01113 Vilnius, Lithuania
* Correspondence: yjin@nuaa.edu.cn (Y.J.); tomas@laei.lt (T.B.)
立陶宛农业经济研究所，维尔纽斯，立陶宛 * 通信: yjin@nuaa.edu. cn
(y.j. ; tomas@laei.lt (t.b.)

Received: 13 November 2019; Accepted: 4 December 2019; Published: 9 December 2019

收件日期: 2019 年 11 月 13 日; 接受日期: 2019 年 12 月 4 日; 发表日期: 2019 年 12 月 9 日

Abstract: As the main way of providing care for elderly people, home-based old-age care puts
forward higher requirements for the environmental adaptability of the community. Five
communities in Wuhu were selected for a comprehensive assessment of environmental suitability.
In order to ensure a comprehensive and accurate assessment of the environmental adaptability of
the community, we used the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to calculate the weight of each
indicator and the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) method to
evaluate the adaptability of community, as well as further analyses using a two-dimensional data
space map. The results show that the Weixing community is the most suitable for the elderly and
outdoor activities of the community.
家庭养老作为养老的主要方式，对社区的环境适应性提出了更高的要求。选择了芜湖的五个社区进
行环境适宜性的综合评估。为了全面准确地评价群落的环境适应性，采用层级分析法(AHP)计算各
指标的权重，运用理想解相似度法(TOPSIS)进行排序偏好技术，对群落的适应性进行评价，并利用
二维数据空间图进行分析。结果表明，威兴社区是最适合老年人和户外活动的社区。

Keywords: community-based elder care; comprehensive evaluation; elderly oriented; TOPSIS

analysis method
关键词: 社区养老; 综合评价; 面向老年; TOPSIS 分析法

1. Introduction
1. 引言
 The aging population has become a serious challenge to global social development. China is the
only country in the world with an elderly population approaching 250 million, and old-age support has
become a major responsibility for Chinese families and society [1]. With the implementation of the 13th
Five-Year Plan for Construction of Social Pension Service System, the old-aged service system that is
based on home-based old-age care and that has relied on the community and is supported by institutions
has initially taken shape [2]. This new pension model combines home-based care and community service
organically so that elderly people can not only receive proper life and spiritual care, but also continue to
live in a familiar community environment [3]. Against this background, the quality of the living environment
has become an important pursuit of elderly groups to improve the quality of life in their later years,
especially elderly people who have the ability to move and who prefer to participate in outdoor activities
that can meet their physiological and behavioral characteristics, which puts forward higher requirements
for the construction of a community environment that suits elderly people. Thus, research on the
assessment of suiting the community environment to elderly people has an important reference value for
urban residential environment planning, the regional development model and the development direction
of urban real estate, and caters to the will of many elderly people to provide for the aged at home, which
has positive social significance [4].
人口老龄化已经成为全球社会发展面临的严峻挑战。中国是世界上唯一一个老年人口接近 2.5 亿的国
家，养老已成为中国家庭和社会的主要责任[1]。随着“十三五”社会养老服务体系建设规划的实施，以家庭
养老为基础、依托社会、事业单位养老的养老服务体系初步形成[2]。这种新的养老金模式将家庭护理和社
区服务有机地结合起来，使老年人不仅能够得到适当的生活和精神护理，而且能够继续生活在熟悉的社区
环境中[3]。在此背景下，居住环境质量已成为老年人提高晚年生活质量的重要追求，特别是具有活动能力、
喜欢参加符合其生理和行为特点的户外活动的老年人，对构建适合老年人的社区环境提出了更高的要求。
因此，研究老年人社区环境适宜性评价对城市居住环境规划、区域发展模式和城市房地产发展方向具有重
要参考价值，符合广大老年人居家养老的意愿，具有积极的社会意义[4]。

Information 2019, 10, 389; doi:10.3390/info10120389 www.mdpi.com/journal/information

Information 2019,10,389; doi: 10.3390/info10120389 www.mdpi. com/journal/Information
 2 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 2/18

In the 1950s, Doxiadis first proposed the concept of “human settlements science”. Since then,
scholars have focused on the study of urban livability and the suitability of the community environment for
elderly people. Current studies mainly focus on the influencing factors and evaluation methods of a
suitable community environment for elderly people to analyze the degree of the suitability of the
community environment for elderly people. Rostron put forward the corresponding design principles for
the external environment of elderly people’s residential areas from the aspects of a site layout and
detailed design based on the perspective of the behavioral psychology of elderly people [5]. Salzano
explored the concept of livability from the perspective of sustainable development and considered the
livable environment of elderly people from the perspective of the sustainable development of urban
construction; he believed that factors such as the interpersonal relationships of elderly people,
construction of community environmental facilities and location selection would a ect the living
environment of elderly people [6]. Douglass advanced the basic conditions for the harmonious
development of livable cities from the perspective of a correlation among humans, the environment and
society [7]. Through studying a comprehensive environmental assessment of elderly communities, the
British Economist Intelligence Unit has created an index system for evaluating urban livability that
included three groups of indicators, namely, health and safety, culture and the environment, and
infrastructure [8]. Harvey proposed to use a geographic information system, an Internet survey and social
media to investigate the physical characteristics on the spatial scale of the block and residents’
satisfaction to e ectively measure the livability of urban communities [9]. In the 1990s, Wu began to
conduct relevant research on urban human settlements, established a scientific and theoretical
framework for the environment of human settlements, and advanced the principle of people-oriented
environmental construction [10]. Based on a survey of the living environment of elderly people in Beijing,
Qu compiled a localized gauge that is divided into four dimensions, including a housing environment
assessment, community environment assessment, service environment assessment and interpersonal
environment assessment for evaluating the living environment of elderly people in cities. It is clear that
the key task of constructing a livable community for elderly people in Beijing is to improve the
construction of accessible community access, sports venues and other related environmental facilities
[11]. He and Wei analyzed the status of building community environment renovation for senior people and
raised environment renovation strategies and service facilities configuration [12]. Li proposed construction
strategies of endowment facilities during community restructuring [13]. Many factors a ect the suitability of
the community environment for elderly people, but it is not advisable to integrate them all into an
evaluation index system. Therefore, constructing a community environment evaluation index system
suitable for elderly people should be based on the specific situation.
20 世纪 50 年代，Doxiadis 首次提出了“人类住区科学”的概念。从那时起，学者们就专注于研究城市
的宜居性和社区环境对老年人的适宜性。目前的研究主要集中在适合老年人的社区环境的影响因素和评价
方法上，以分析社区环境对老年人的适宜程度。罗斯特伦从老年人行为心理的角度出发，从场地布局和详
细设计两个方面提出了相应的老年人居住区外部环境设计原则[5]。萨尔扎诺从可持续发展的角度探讨宜居
的概念，从城市建设的可持续发展的角度考虑老年人的宜居环境，他认为老年人的人际关系、社区环境设
施的建设和选址等因素会影响老年人的生活环境[6]。Douglass 从人类，环境和社会之间的相关性的角度提
出了宜居城市和谐发展的基本条件[7]。通过研究老年社区的综合环境评估，英国经济学人智库建立了一个
评估城市宜居性的指数系统，其中包括三组指标，即健康和安全、文化和环境以及基础设施[8]。Harvey 建
议使用地理信息系统、互联网调查和社交媒体来调查街区空间尺度上的物理特征和居民满意度，以有效地
衡量城市社区的宜居性[9]。20 世纪 90 年代，吴邦国开始对城市人居环境进行相关研究，建立了人居环境
的科学理论框架，提出了以人为本的环境建设原则[10]。在对北京市老年人生活环境调查的基础上，屈宏斌
编制了一个本土化的评价量表，该量表分为住房环境评价、社区环境评价、服务环境评价和人际环境评价
四个维度来评价城市老年人的生活环境。很明显，北京老年人宜居社区建设的关键任务是改善无障碍社区
通道、体育场馆和其他相关环境设施的建设[11]。何伟分析了老年人社区环境改造的现状，提出了环境改造
策略和服务设施配置[12]。李肇星提出了社区重组期间养老设施的建设策略[13]。许多因素影响社区环境对
老年人的适宜性，但将它们全部纳入评价指标体系是不可取的。因此，构建一个适合老年人的社区环境评
价指标体系应该基于具体情况。

Apart from studies on the factors that a ected the suitability of the community environment for elderly
people, scholars have also paid attention to the evaluation methods on the suitability of the community
environment for elderly people. Wu and Tang identified four evaluative objectives, road site adaptability,
facility universality, space diversification and environment gracefulness, from the perspective of a
rehabilitation landscape and 15 evaluative factors. They also established an evaluation index system for
the restoration of the external environment of elderly apartments by using the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP) [14]. Lu et al. used principal component analysis to study the quality and spatial pattern of the
residential ecological environment in the central city of Hangzhou and obtained the measures that
needed to be adopted to protect and repair the fragile zone of the residential ecological environment [4].
Sang et al. established an evaluation index by using qualitative–quantitative methods to test the e
ectiveness of the suitability of an elderly urban construction index system [15]. Yu and Hu constructed an
index system and a calculation model to scientifically evaluate urban leisure Greenland adaptability for
elderly people [16]. Gupta sorts green human resource management using the best-worst method (BWM)
[17]. Rezaei compared with other multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods and proposed that the
BWM method needs less data and pairwise combination, and its result is more reliable [18]. Panmucar et
al. employed the full
除了研究影响社区环境对老年人适宜性的因素外，学者们还关注社区环境对老年人适宜性的评价方法。
吴和唐从康复景观和 15 个评价因子的角度确定了四个评价目标，即道路场地适应性、设施普遍性、空间多
样性和环境优美性。运用层级分析法(AHP)建立了老年公寓外部环境恢复的评价指标体系。Lu 等运用主成
分分析方法对杭州市中心城区居住生态环境的质量和空间格局进行了研究，得出了保护和修复居住生态环
境脆弱带所需采取的措施[4]。Sang 等人利用定性-定量方法建立了一个评价指标，以检验老年城市建设指
标体系的适宜性的有效性[15]。Yu 和 Hu 构建了一个指标体系和计算模型，科学评估城市休闲绿地对老年
人的适应性[16]。Gupta 使用最佳最差方法(BWM)对绿色人力资源管理进行分类[17]。Rezaei 与其他多准
则决策(MCDM)方法进行了比较，提出了 BWM 方法需要较少的数据和成对组合，其结果更可靠[18]。
Panmucar 等人采用了完整的
 3 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 3/18

consistency method (FUCOM) in ranking of tra c demand management measures [19]. Eghbali-
Zarch et al. used the step-wise weight assessment ratio analysis (SWARA) method to compare and
rank the e ects of anti-diabetic medication objects, and the validity of the model in determining
weights was verified [20]. Mardani et al. categorized the literature and did systematic research on
the classification of the MCDM methods, including the new SWARA method [21].
交通需求管理措施排序中的一致性方法(FUCOM)[19]。Eghbali-Zarch 等采用逐步权重评估比率分析
(SWARA)方法对抗糖尿病药物的疗效进行比较和排序，验证了该模型在确定权重方面的有效性[20]。
Mardani 等人对文献进行了分类，并对 MCDM 方法的分类进行了系统研究，包括新的 SWARA 方法
[21]。
Until now, studies on the evaluation method of the suitability of elderly people’s community
environment are in the early stage, and the current evaluation methods mainly use quantitative
analysis to analyze the degree of suitability of the community environment for elderly people.
Although there is abundant literature and experience in the area of community environment
research at home and abroad, few studies have been conducted on evaluating the environment of
outdoor activities for elderly people. Although the Qingdao, Huzhou, Shanghai and Changning
districts (among other places) have introduced an evaluating index system of old-age friendly cities,
there are few evaluation tools for an elderly livable community, and the importance of a subjective
evaluation of elderly people is seriously insu cient [11]. In the selection of indicators, most of the
classification indicators are based on the suitability of environmental human settlements, without
considering the actual needs of elderly people from the particularity of their physiological and
behavioral characteristics. When using mathematical models for evaluation, only some dimensions
are often considered, and the comprehensiveness of the factors is not taken into account.
目前，关于老年人社区环境适宜性评价方法的研究还处于起步阶段，现有的评价方法主要采用定
量分析的方法来分析社区环境对老年人的适宜程度。尽管国内外在社区环境研究领域有丰富的文献和
经验，但对老年人户外活动环境评价的研究还很少。虽然青岛、湖州、上海和长宁等地已经引入了老
年友好型城市的评价指标体系，但是对老年宜居社区的评价工具还很少，对老年人进行主观评价的重
要性是非常明显的[11]。在指标的选择上，大多数分类指标都是基于环境人居环境的适宜性，而没有
从老年人生理和行为特征的特殊性考虑老年人的实际需要。当使用数学模型进行评估时，往往只考虑
一些维度，而没有考虑因素的综合性。
To fill this important research gap, in this paper, according to the four dimensions comprising
site environment, road environment, ecological environment and green environment, a
comprehensive evaluation index system including 39 indicators are constructed. Furthermore, using
the method of AHP to calculate the weight of each indicator and the improved technique for order
preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) to evaluate the community environment, would
clarify the community environment which is suitable for the old people to live in and move. The
hybrid model of AHP–TOPSIS realizes the comprehensive evaluation of qualitative and quantitative
indexes and avoids the defects of the single model. Our main contributions are the following: First,
considering the factors of the community environment suitable for the aged, a relatively
comprehensive evaluation index system is established; second, using the improved TOPSIS
method to evaluate the results, the reliability and accuracy of the results are increased; and third,
the reference opinions are given to the government and relevant departments in renovating the
community environment and considering the living environment of the elderly.
为了填补这一重要的研究空白，本文从场地环境、道路环境、生态环境和绿色环境四个维度出发，
构建了包含 39 个指标的综合评价指标体系。此外，运用层次分析法计算各指标的权重，并采用改进
的 TOPSIS 排序偏好技术对社区环境进行评价，从而明确适合老年人居住和迁移的社区环境。混合
模型的 AHP-TOPSIS 实现了定性和定量指标的综合评价，避免了单一模型的缺陷。我们的主要贡献
是: 首先，考虑到适合老年人居住的社区环境因素，建立了一个比较全面的评价指标体系; 其次，采用
改进的 TOPSIS 法对评价结果进行评价，提高了评价结果的可靠性和准确性; 第三，为政府和有关部
门在改造社区环境和考虑老年人居住环境方面提供了参考意见。
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the comprehensive process
evaluation index system of the suitability of an elderly community environment is established from
multiple dimensions, which measures the level of community environment aging. In Section 3, this
index system calculates the weight of the indicators by using AHP and on this basis improves the
TOPSIS method through a two-dimensional data space map to make the evaluation process more
scientific and appropriate. In Section 4, the validity and e ectiveness of the method are verified by
taking five communities in Wuhu City as evaluation objects. Conclusions and further studies are
drawn in Section 5.
文件其余部分的组织如下。第二部分从多维度构建了老年社区环境适宜性的综合过程评价指标体
系，用以衡量社区环境老龄化程度。在第三部分中，该指标体系采用层次分析法计算指标权重，并在
此基础上通过二维数据空间图对 TOPSIS 法进行改进，使评价过程更加科学合理。第四部分以芜湖
市五个社区为评价对象，验证了该方法的有效性和有效性。结论和进一步的研究在第 5 部分得出。

2. Comprehensive Evaluation Index System of the Suitability of the Community Environment

for Elderly People
老年人社区环境适宜性综合评价指标体系

The premise of the evaluation is to establish an evaluation index system suitable for the community
environment of elderly people [22]. Based on the principle of combining quantitative and qualitative
indicators, according to the basic concepts of gerontology [23] and the requirements of the Code for the
Design of Residential Architecture for the Elderly (GB50340-2016) [24] issued by the Ministry of Housing
and Construction in 2016, and referring to the evaluation studies of other livable cities [25,26], this paper
studies the suitability of the community environment for elderly people according to the site environment,
road environment, greening environment and health. Based on the above four dimensions, an evaluation
index system of the suitability of the community environment for
评估的前提是建立一个适合老年人社区环境的评估指标体系[22]。本文根据定量和定性指标相结合的
原则，按照老年学的基本概念[23]和住房和建设部 2016 年颁布的《老年居住建筑设计规范》(GB50340-
2016)[24]的要求，参照其他宜居城市的评价研究[25,26] ，从场地环境、道路环境、绿化环境和健康等方面
研究了社区环境对老年人的适宜性。基于以上四个维度，社区环境适宜性评价指标体系
 4 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 4/18

elderly people is constructed to realize the standardization of the evaluation process. Considering
the di erences in the psychological and behavioral characteristics of elderly people at di erent ages,
the evaluation is conducted on the premise of meeting a diversity of outdoor activities for elderly
people in the field environment by focusing on factors such as space, safety and facilities. Safety,
convenience and a barrier-free road environment within the community are important conditions to
green planting, plant diversity and greening facilities. The quality of the ecological environment is
构建老年人评价体系，实现老年人评价过程的规范化。针对不同年龄段老年人心理和行为特征的差异，
在满足老年人户外活动多样性的前提下，以空间、安全、设施等因素为重点进行评价。社区内的安全、
便利和无障碍道路环境是绿色种植、植物多样性和绿化设施的重要条件。生态环境的质量是
4 of
23
23 个
Information 2019, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 中的
资料 2019,10，x 供同行评议 4个
maintain outdoor activities for elderly people. Therefore, in terms of road environment, based on the
为长者进行户外活动。因此，就道路环境而言，根据
premise of road safety, convenience and barrier-free tra c behavior, the evaluation is performed with
在道路安全、便捷和无障碍交通行为的前提下，用
environment, on the premise of road safety, convenience and -free traffic behavior, the evaluation
环境, 在道路安全、方便和 ——自由交通行为的评价
factors suchbasedr ad spac , road safety, road signs, tc. Moreover,barriergood greening nvironment not
因素，如广告空间，道路安全，道路标志等。此外，障碍良好的绿化环境不
is performed with factors such as road space, road safety, road signs, etc. Moreover, a good greening
实施only can pur fy the air and regulate the 有道路空间、道路安全、道路标志等因素。此外，良好的绿化
regional microclimate but also can bring good sensory pleasure
不仅可以净化空气，调节区域小气候，而且可以带来良好的感官愉悦
environment not only can purify the air and regulate the regional but also can bring good
环境不仅可以净化空气，调节区域
to elderly people. At the same time, a good greening environmentmicroclimatealsohascertain 还能带来好处
role in
health
同时，良好的绿化环境、小气候对长者的健康也有一定的作用
sensory pleasure to elderly people. At the same time, a good greening environment also has certain
在... role in
... 中扮演
长者的感官享受。同时，良好的绿化环境也 某种角色
care. Therefore, in terms of a greening environ ent, the evaluation mainly focuses on factors such as
因此，就绿化环境而言，评估主要集中在
health care. Therefore, in terms of a greening environment, the evaluation mainly focuses factors such as
因此，在绿化环境方面，评价主要集中在 因素，如
green planting, plant diversity and greening facilities. The quality of the ecological environment is an an important prerequisite to e sure the normal activities of the elderly community. In th s respect,
绿化种植、植物多样性及绿化设施。生态环境的质量是确保老年人社区正常活动的重要前提。在这方面,

importantfactorsprerequisitesuchasthe soundtoensureenvironment,thenormalwateractivitiesenvironmentoftheelderlyandaircommunity.environmentIn thisintherespect,communityfactorsaresuch as

老年人和社区的水上活动环境。在这方面，社区因素包括
the sound environment, water environment air environment in the are evaluated in evaluated
in accordance with the relevant standards and norms promulgatedcommunitybythesate.
根据国家颁布的有关标准和规范，对其中的声环境、水环境、空气环境进行了评价。
accordance with the relevant standards and norms promulgated by the state.
符合国家颁布的有关标准和规范。

This paper constructs four evaluative index systems of the suitability of the community
本文构建了社区适宜性的四个评价指标体系
This paper constructs four evaluative index systems of the suitability of the community environment for environment for elderly people, which includes
the four levels of the target level, criterion level,
本文构建了社区环境对老年人环境适宜性的四个评价指标体系，包括目标层次、标准层次、评价指标体系、评价指标体系、评价指标体系和评价指标体
系,
elderly people, which includes the four levels of the target level, criterion level, sub-criterion level and sub-criterion level and indicator level, by using AHP. And
the following shows the algorithm flow of indicatorAHP level,(Figureby1using). AHP. And the following shows the algorithm flow of AHP (Figure 1).
运用层次分析法，将老年人群分为目标层次、标准层次、次标准层次、次标准层次和指标层次四个层次。下面显示了指标层次的算法流程(图 1using)。层次分
析。下面显示了 AHP 的算法流程(图 1)。

Figure 1. Flow chart of analytic hierarchy process.

 图 1。层级分析法流程图。
Figure 1. Flow chart of analytic hierarchy process.
图 1。层级分析法流程图。
We invited a panel of 15 experts from the environmental sciences to compare the relative importance
我们邀请了一个由 15 名环境科学专家组成的小组来比较相对重要性
ofWeeachinvitedindicator,panelfindofout15 theexpertsweightfromof theeachenvironmentalindicator,and sciencesmeetthetoconsistencycompare thetestrelative. importance of
在每一个被邀请的指标中，专家小组从每一个环境指标中找出 15 个权重较大的专家，并且科学符合一致性比较测试的相对重要性

each indicTator,ble1findshowsoutthethesiteweightenvironmentofeachindicator, systeandmeetof thesuitabilityconsistencyof atestcommunity. environment

每个指标，ble1 发现表明这个网站加强了每个指标，系统和满足适用性一致性的社区环境
forTabelderly1showspeople,theandsitetheenvironmentnextthree tablesindicator(Tablessystem2–4) ofshowthe thesuitabilityroadenvironmentofacommunityindicatorenvironmentsystem, for

elderlyecologicalpeople,environmentandthenextindicatorthreetablessystem(Tableand 2greening–4)showenvironmenttheroadenvironmentindicatorsystemindicatorofthesysuitabilitytem,ecological

environmentofacommunindicatortyenvironmentsystemandforgreeningelderlypenvironmentople.Theconindicatorotation andsystemsymbolsoftheofsuitabilityeachlevel ofareashowncommunity

environmentinthefourforevaluativeelderlypeopleindex. systems,Theconnotationrespectivelyand. symbolsAndtheyofuseeachAi,levelBi,Ci,areandshownDi(I in= 1,the2, four3,:: :evaluative,m)

indextosystems,representrespectivelythem.On .thisAndbasis,they ausejudgmentAi,Bi,Ci,matrixand Diis constructed(I=1,2,3,…to, m)determinetorepresenttheweightsthem.Onofthisthe basis,

老年人 1 表示人、地点和环境接下来的三个表格指标(表 2-4)表示社区环境指标体系、老年人生态环境指标体系、老年人生态环境指标体系和老年人绿化指标体系(表 2-4)表示环境指标体系。指示

符号和系统符号表示社区环境在四个有价值的老年人指数中的适用程度。系统，内涵分别和。使用每个 hai，levelBi，Ci，areandshownDi (i in = 1，the2，four3，: : evaluative，m)索引到系统，分别代

表它们。在此基础上，它们使用判断台，Bi，Ci，矩阵和 Diis 构造(i = 1,2,3，... to，m)来确定它们的权重。在此基础上,

a judgmentindicatorsmatrixeachislevelconstructedthrough singltodetermineranking,theaconsistencyweightsoftesttheandindicatorsoverallrankingateach[27level,28]. throughHere,wesingle

ranking,usetheaconsistencyAHPmethodtestto anddetermineoveralltherankingweight[27,28]ofthe .indicators,Here,wewhich usethecanAHPreducemethodtheinfluenctodetermineofthe the

weightexperts’ofthesubjectivityindicators,towhichsome extent,canreduceand solvetheinfluencproblemtheofthethatexptherets’aresubjectivitytooman factorssomeandextent,the and

solvesituationtheproblemiscomplicatedthatthereto assignretoothemanyweightfactors[29]. and the situation is complicated to assign the weight [29]. The evaluation of each index is

divided into five grades by using ek(K = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) for expression (such as Tables 5–8); e1 is the best, and e5 is the worst. In addition, the levels of each grade are set as e1 = 1, e2 = 0.75,

e3 = 0.5, e4 = 0.25 and e5 = 0, which is shown in Tables 5–8.

判断指标矩阵每个级别通过单个确定的排名构建，一致性权重测试和指标总体排名每个[27 级，28]。通过这里，我们单一的排名，使用一致的方法来测试和确定总体排名权重[27,28]。在这里，我们可以

推导出一种方法来确定主观指标的权重专家的影响，在一定程度上，可以减少和解决专家的主观因素在一定程度上的影响问题，问题的解决错综复杂地指定了其他许多权重因素[29]。并且分配权重的情

况很复杂[29]。每个指标的评价分为五个等级，用 ek (k = 1,2,3,4,5)表示(如表 5-8) ，e1 是最好的，e5 是最差的。此外，每个年级的水平设定为 e1 = 1，e2 = 0.75，e3 = 0.5，e4 = 0.25 和 e5 = 0，如表 5-8 所

示。
Information 2019, 10, 389 5 of 18
Information 2019,10,3895 of 18

Table 1. Site environment indicator system of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表一.. 「社区环境适合长者居住的地点环境指标系统」。

Criterion Layer B The Sub-Target Layer C Indicator Layer D The Description of the Indicator
准则层 b 子目标层 c 指标层 d 指标说明
Accessibility of site space D1 Walking distance and accessibility to the activity site
Site space C1
站点空间的可访问性 D1 步行距离和到达活动地点的可达性
网站空间 C1
Satisfaction of the site layout to Could be based on the elderly dynamic, such as static,
elderly communication, sitting alone and
满足老年人对场地布局的要求 可以根据老年人的动态，如静态、交流、独坐和
activities D2 other di erent activities to conduct a variety of site layouts
活动 D2 进行各种网站布局的其他不同活动
Share of site area D3 Proportion between the site area and total community area
地盘面积 d3 的份额 场地面积与社区总面积之间的比例
Flatness of ground pavement D4 The allowable deviation within 1 m2 does not exceed 2 mm
D4 路面平整度 1 平方米内的允许偏差不超过 2 毫米
Site environment B1 Site safety C2 Skid resistance of ground D5 Anti-skidding e ect of di erent ground paving materials
工地环境 B1 站点安全 C2 地面 d5 的抗滑性 不同地面铺装材料的防滑效果
Safety of ground height di erence treatment at ground, site and
road intersections in each
Safety of height di erence 各路段地面、场地和道路交叉口地面高差处理的安全性
processing D6 zone of the site; rationality of the slope-setting form
高差处理的安全性 D6 场地的区域; 斜坡设置形式的合理性
Lamp lighting rate at night on the Proportion of normal running streetlamps to all streetlamps within
street D7 the site
街道 d7 夜间灯光照明率 正常运行的路灯与工地内所有路灯的比例
E ectively ensure the safety of elderly people when using activities
and fitness facilities
Site activity facilities C3 Safety of mobile facilities D8
流动设施的安全 D8 E 有效确保长者使用活动及健身设施时的安全
场地活动设施 C3
Ease-of-use of mobile facilities Configuration of easy-to-learn and easy-to-operate activity
D9 facilities for the behavioral
 流动设施的易用性 D9 配置易于学习和易于操作的行为活动设施
and physiological characteristics of elderly people
以及老年人的生理特征
Setting up rate of recreational Proportion between sports and health-care facilities and all
facilities D10 facilities
康乐设施设置率 D10 体育和保健设施与所有设施之间的比例

Table 2. Road environment indicator system of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表二。适合长者居住的社区环境的道路环境指标体系。

Criterion Layer B The Sub-Target Layer C Indicator Layer D The Description of the Indicator
准则层 b 子目标层 c 指标层 d 指标说明
Smoothness of walking road D11 The allowable deviation within 1 m2 does not exceed 2 mm
步行道的平滑度 D11 1 平方米内的允许偏差不超过 2 毫米
Avoiding all types of natural or man-made obstacles in accessible
routes that hinder
Road safety C4
道路安全 C4 Connectivity of barrier-free routes 避免在无障碍道路上设置各种天然或人为障碍物
D12 elderly people’s walking or wheelchair tra c
无障碍路线 d12 的连通性 长者步行或轮椅列车
The safety of road intersections
D13 Blind distance barrier at road intersection
D13 交叉路口的安全 道路交叉口盲距离障碍物
Lamp lighting rate at night on the
street D14 Proportion of normal running streetlamps to all streetlamps
D14 街道晚上的灯光亮度 正常运行的路灯与所有路灯的比例
Areal roads, group roads, residential roads, barrier-free access to
meet the requirements
The suitability of the spatial scale 面积道路，群路，住宅道路，无障碍通道，以满足要求
Road environment B2 Road space C5 D15 of the “urban residential area planning and design norms”
道路环境 B2 道路空间 C5 空间尺度 d15 的适用性 城市居住区规划设计规范
E ectiveness of man-vehicle For the management of pedestrian–vehicle diversion, people flow
distribution and tra c flow should
人车分配的有效性 对于行人-车辆分流的管理，人流和交通流量应该
management measures D16 be completely separated, and each should go its own way without
 管理措施 D16 interference
完全分开，各自为政，不受干扰
The trees, shrubs, turf, flowers and other landscape elements on
both sides of the road are
道路两旁的树木、灌木、草坪、花卉和其他景观元素
The beauty of road landscape D17 well matched and can be well received by elderly people
美丽的道路景观 D17 配合良好，并能深受长者欢迎
Sign board layout covers a wide range of locations and is easy to
Rationality of sign location D18 identify
Road signs C6
D18 标志位置的合理性 标志牌的布局覆盖了广泛的位置，并且很容易识别
路标 C6
The fitness of the visual range for
logo plates Logo plates highly meet the recognition needs of elderly people
标志牌视觉范围的适合性 标志牌高度满足长者的认知需求
D19
D19
Identification of layout Label size, color and layout of logo board to meet the needs of
information D20 elderly identification
识别布局信息 D20 标签尺寸、颜色和布局的标志板，以满足老年人识别的需要
Information 2019, 10, 389 6 of 18
Information 2019,10,3896 of 18 信息 2019,10,389

Table 3. Ecological environment indicator system of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表 3. 社区环境适合老年人的生态环境指标体系。

Criterion Layer B The Sub-Target Layer C Indicator Layer D The Description of the Indicator
准则层 b 子目标层 c 指标层 d 指标说明
The interference degree of environmental noise in the daytime
Noise in the daytime D21 community on elderly activities was
白天的噪音 D21 白天社区环境噪声对老年人活动的干扰程度为
evaluated according to GB 3096-2008 and the Acoustic
Acoustic environment
C7 Environmental Quality Standard
声音景观 C7 根据 gb3096-2008 和声学环境质量标准进行评价
The interference degree of environmental noise at night in the
Noise at night D22 community for elderly activities was
夜晚的噪音 D22 社区夜间环境噪音对长者活动的干扰程度为
evaluated according to GB 3096-2008 and the Acoustic
Environmental Quality Standard
根据 gb3096-2008 和声学环境质量标准进行评价
The quality of landscape The landscape water quality of falling water, fountains and pools in
Ecological environment
Water environment C8 water D23 the community
B3
水环境 C8 景观水质 D23 社区内流水、喷泉及池塘的景观水质
生态环境 B3
Safety degree of landscape The considerations of safety design such as height, shape, and anti-slip
river and anti-fall material of
景观河流安全度 安全设计的考虑，如高度，形状，防滑和防跌材料的
embankments D24 riverbanks and embankments
路堤 D24 河堤及河堤
Evaluation of regional air quality based on “the Quality Standard of
Air quality D25 Environmental Air”
空气质素 D25 根据「环境空气质素标准」评估区域空气质素
(GB3095-2012)
Air environment C9 (GB3095-2012)
空气环境 C9
Air negative ion concentration Number of negative ions per unit volume of air
 D26 每单位空气体积的负离子数
空气负离子浓度 D26
The comfort of air humidity Standard value of relative air humidity: 40–60% in summer, 30 60%
D27 in winter
舒适的空气湿度 D27 相对空气湿度标准值: 夏季 40-60% ，冬季 30-60%
The comfort of air flow rates
D28 Standard value of air flow rates: in summer 0.3 m/s, in winter 0.2 m/s
舒适的空气流动率 D28 空气流速的标准值: 夏季 0.3 m/s，冬季 0.2 m/s

Table 4. Greening environment indicator system of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表 4. 社区环境适合老年人的绿化环境指标体系。

Criterion Layer B The Sub-Target Layer C Indicator Layer D The Description of the Indicator
准则层 b 子目标层 c 指标层 d 指标说明
Green coverage D29 Ratio of total greening coverage area to total area in community
绿色覆盖 D29 社区总绿化覆盖面积占总面积的比率
The per capita green area D30 The per capita green area in the community
人均绿化面积 D30 社区人均绿化面积
The proportion of green plants seen by human eyes that focuses on
Green looking ratio D31 the three-dimensional
绿色外观比率 D31 人眼所看到的绿色植物的比例集中在三维
composition of community greening
Greening planting C10 社区绿化的组成
绿化种植 C10
Rationality of multilayer The proportion of trees to shrubs is 1:3–1:6, and the area of turf is not
planting D32 higher than 30% of the total
D32 多层种植的合理性 乔木与灌木的比例为 1:3ー1:6，草坪面积不超过总面积的 30%
area of green space
绿地面积

Excellence rate of plant growth Assessment of plant growth quality from the perspective of greening
D33 maintenance and
植物生长的卓越率 D33 从绿化维护的角度评估植物生长质量
Greening environment management
B4 管理
绿化环境 B4 Accessibility of plant A reasonable plant community layout can enable people to enter the
 communities D34 plant community for
植物群落的可及性 D34 一个合理的植物群落布局可以使人们进入植物群落
close-range ornamentation
近距离的装饰
Degree of perfection of Refers to the configuration of shading and rainproof greening
protective facilities facilities
Activity facilities of 保护设施的完善程度
greenbelt C11 指遮阳、防雨绿化设施的配置
D35
绿化带 c11 的活动设施 D35
Evaluate the quality of greening facilities from the perspective of
Intact rate of facility D36 management and maintenance
设施完好率 D36 从管理和维修的角度评估绿化设施的质量
Rehabilitative plant planting Ratio of the number of plants planted and the total number of plants
rate D37 planted for the health and
恢复植物种植率 D37 种植植物数量与种植植物总数的比率
Diversity of greening rehabilitation of elderly people, both physically and psychologically
plants C12 长者的身心康复
绿化植物的多样性 C12 Plants have various species, richness levels and obvious ecological
Ornamentality D38 benefits
装饰品 D38 植物有不同的物种，丰富的水平和明显的生态效益
The local plant cultivation that evokes emotional identity among
Regionality D39 elderly people
Regionality d39 地区 D39 当地的植物种植唤起了老年人的情感认同
 7 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 7/18

Table 5. Site environment classification criteria of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表 5. 适合老年人居住的社区环境的场地环境分类标准。

Level of
Level Evaluation Index System Evaluation
水平评价指标体系 评估水平
e5 : Level
5
e1 : Level 1 e2 : Level 2 e3 : Level 3 e4 : Level 4 E5: 第五
E1: 第一关 E2: 第二关 E3: 第三层 E4: 第四层 关
Accessibility of site Generally easy
space D1 Comparatively
站点空间的可访问性 Very easy easy Easy 一般来说很简 Di cult
Site space C1
D1 非常简单 相对容易 简单 单 我的邪教
网站空间 C1
Satisfaction of the site Completely Comparatively Generally
layout to satisfied satisfied Satisfied satisfied Unsatisfied
网站布局的满意度 完全满意 比较满意 满意了 普遍满意 不满意
elderly activities D2
长者活动 D2
Share of site area D3 30% 29–25% 24–20% 19–15% <15%
地盘面积 d3 的份额 30% 29-25% 24-20% 19-15% 19-15% < 15%
Flatness of ground
pavement D4 <1 mm 1–3 mm 4–6mm 7–10 mm >10 mm
D4 路面平整度 < 1 毫米 1-3 毫米 4-6 毫米 7-10 毫米 > 10 毫米
Site environment B1 Site safety Skid resistance of Completely anti- Generally anti- Very non-
C2 ground D5 skid Anti-skid skid Non-skid skid
工地环境 b1 工地安全 C2 地面 d5 的抗滑性 完全防滑 防滑 一般是防滑的 防滑 非常不滑
Safety of height di
erence Completely safe Comparatively safe Safe Generally safe Dangerous
高差安全 绝对安全 相对安全 安全 基本安全 危险
processing D6
处理 D6
 Lamp lighting rate at
night on the 100% 100–95% 94–90% 89–85% <85%
灯在夜间的照明速度 百分百确定 100-95% 100-95% 94-90% 89-85% 89-85% < 85%
street D7
D7 街
Site activity Safety of mobile
facilities C3 facilities D8 Completely safe Comparatively safe Safe Generally safe Dangerous
场地活动设施 流动设施的安全 D8 绝对安全 相对安全 安全 基本安全 危险
C3 Generally easy Not easy to
Comparatively to use use
Ease-of-use of mobile
facilities D9 Very easy to use easy to use Easy to use 一般来说易于 不容易使
流动设施的易用性 D9 非常容易使用 比较容易使用 易于使用 使用 用
Setting up the rate of
recreational >50% 49–40% 39–30% 29–20% <20%
建立娱乐活动的比率 > 50% 49-40% 39-30% 29%-20% < 20%
facilities D10
设施 D10

Table 6. Road environment classification criteria of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表六。适合长者居住的社区环境的道路环境分类准则。

Level Evaluation Index System Level of Evaluation

水平评价指标体系 评估水平
e1: Level 1 e2 : level 2 e3: Level 3 e4 : level 4 e5: Level 5
E1: 第一关 E2: 第二关 E3: 第三层 E4:4 级 E5: 第五关
Smoothness of walking road D11 <1 mm 1–3 mm 4–6 mm 7–10 mm >10 mm
步行道的平滑度 D11 < 1 毫米 1-3 毫米 4-6 毫米 7-10 毫米 > 10 毫米
Completely Generally Not very Disconnect
Connectivity of barrier-free
Road safety C4 routes D12 connected Connected connected connected ed
道路安全 C4 无障碍路线 d12 的连通性 完全联系在一起 连接 通常连接 没什么关系 断开连接
The safety of road intersections
D13 Completely safe Comparatively safe Safe Generally safe Dangerous
D13 交叉路口的安全 绝对安全 相对安全 安全 基本安全 危险
Lamp lighting rate at night on the
Road environment B2 street D14 100% 100–95% 94–90% 89–85% <85%
道路环境 B2 D14 街道晚上的灯光亮度 百分百确定 100-95% 100-95% 94-90% 89-85% 89-85% < 85%
 Completely Comparatively Generally
The suitability of the spatial scale
D15 suitable suitable Suitable suitable Not suitable
Road space C5
空间尺度 d15 的适用性 完全适合 比较合适 合适 一般适合 不合适
道路空间 C5
E ectiveness of man-vehicle Generally e
distribution Completely e Comparatively e ective
人车分配的有效性 ective ective E ective 总的来说是有效 Ine ective
management measures D16 完全有效 相对有效 有效 的 有效的
管理措施 D16
Completely Comparatively Generally
The beauty of road landscape
D17 beautiful beautiful Beautiful beautiful Ugly
美丽的道路景观 D17 非常漂亮 比较漂亮 美丽 总的来说很漂亮 丑陋
Completely Comparatively Not very Unreasonab
Rationality of sign location D18 reasonable reasonable Reasonable reasonable le
Road signs C6
D18 标志位置的合理性 完全合理 比较合理 合情合理 不是很合理 无理取闹
路标 C6
The fitness of the visual range for Completely Comparatively
logo plate D19
标志牌 d19 的视觉范围的适合 suitable suitable Suitable Not very suitable Not suitable
性 完全适合 比较合适 合适 不太合适 不合适
Completely Generally Not very Unidentifia
Identification of layout
information D20 identifiable Identifiable identifiable identifiable ble
识别布局信息 D20 完全可识别 可识别 一般可识别 不是很明显 身份不明
Information 2019, 10, 389 8 of 18
资讯 2019,10,3898

Table 7. Ecological environment classification criteria of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表七。适合长者居住的社区环境的生态环境分类准则。

Level of
Level Evaluation Index System Evaluation
水平评价指标体系 评估水平
e1 : Level 1 e2 : Level 2 e3 : Level 3
e4 : Level 4 e5 : Level 5
E1: 第一关 E2: 第二关 E3: 第三层 E4: 第四层 E5: 第五关
Acoustic 36 dB–50 dB 61 dB–70 dB
environment C7 <35 dB 36 分贝至 50 51 dB–60 dB 61 分贝-70 分 >70 dB
Noise in the daytime D21
声音景观 C7 白天的噪音 D21 < 35 分贝 分贝 51 分贝至 60 分贝 贝 > 70 分贝
26 dB–40 dB 51 dB–60 dB
<25 dB 26 分贝-40 分 41 dB–50 dB 51 分贝至 60 >60 dB
Noise at night D22
夜晚的噪音 D22 < 25 分贝 贝 41 dB-50 dB 分贝 > 60 分贝
Water The quality of landscape water Very good Good Generally good Bad Very bad
environment C8 D23
景观水质 D23 非常好 很好 总的来说还不错 坏的 非常糟糕
水环境 C8 Safety degree of landscape Comparatively
river embankments Completely safe safe Safe Generally safe Dangerous
景观河堤的安全度 绝对安全 相对安全 安全 基本安全 危险
Ecological environment B3
D24
生态环境 B3 D24
Air quality D25 One-level Two-level Three-level Four-level Five-level
空气质素 D25 一级 二级 三层 四级 五级
Air environment Air negative ion concentration
C9 D26 1500–1000 999–650 649–500 <500
空气环境 C9 空气负离子浓度 D26 1500 1500-1000 999-650 649-500 < 500
Completely Generally Uncomfortabl Very
The comfort of air humidity comfortable Comfortable comfortable e uncomfortable
D27
舒适的空气湿度 D27 非常舒服 很舒服 一般都很舒服 不舒服 非常不舒服
Completely Generally Uncomfortabl Very
The comfort of air flow rates comfortable Comfortable comfortable e uncomfortable
D28
舒适的空气流动率 D28 非常舒服 很舒服 一般都很舒服 不舒服 非常不舒服
 Table 8. Greening environment classification criteria of the suitability of a community environment for elderly people.
表 8。社区环境适合老年人的绿化环境分类标准。

Level of
Level Evaluation Index System Evaluation
水平评价指标体系 评估水平
e1 : Level 1 e2 : Level 2 e3 : Level 3 e4 : Level 4 e5 : Level 5
E1: 第一关 E2: 第二关 E3: 第三层 E4: 第四层 E5: 第五关
Green coverage D29 35% 34–30% 29–25% 24–20% <20%
绿色覆盖 D29 35% 34-30% 29-25% 24-20% < 20%
>15 m2 11–7 m2 6–5 m2 <5 m2
The per capita green area D30 面积 > 15 15–12 m2 11-7 平方 6-5 m26- < 5 平方
人均绿化面积 D30 平方米 15-12 m2 米 5 m2 米
Greening planting Green looking ratio D31 25% 24–20% 19–15% 14–10% <10%
C10 绿色外观比率 D31 25% 24-20% 19-15% 19-15% 14-10% 14-10% < 10%
绿化种植 C10 Completely Generally Very
Rationality of multilayer reasonable Reasonable reasonable Unreasonable unreasonable
planting D32
D32 多层种植的合理性 完全合理 合情合理 一般合理 无理取闹 非常不合理
Excellence rate of plant growth
Greening environment B4 D33 >95% 94–92% 91–89% 88–85% <85%
绿化环境 B4 植物生长的卓越率 D33 > 95% 94-92% 91-89% 88-85% 88-85% < 85%
Accessibility of plant
communities D34 25% 24–20% 19–15% 14–10% <10%
植物群落的可及性 D34 25% 24-20% 19-15% 19-15% 14-10% 14-10% < 10%
Activity facilities Comparatively Not very
of Degree of perfection of asylum Very complete complete Complete complete Incomplete
facilities D35
活动设施 庇护设施的完善程度 非常完整 比较完整 完整 不是很完整 不完整
greenbelt C11 100–95%
绿化带 C11 100%
Intact rate of facility D36 100-95% 100- 94–90% 89–85% >85%
设施完好率 D36 百分百确定 95% 94-90% 89-85% 89-85% > 85%
Diversity of
greening Rehabilitative plant planting
rate D37 30% 29–20% 19–15% 14–10% <10%
绿化的多样性 恢复植物种植率 D37 30% 29%-20% 19-15% 19-15% 14-10% 14-10% < 10%
Completely Comparatively Generally
plants C12 OrnamentalityD38 beautiful beautiful Beautiful beautiful Ugly
植物 C12 观赏性 d38 非常漂亮 比较漂亮 美丽 总的来说很漂 丑陋
 亮
Regionality D39 35% 34–25% 24–15% 14–10% <10%
Regionality d39 地区 D39 35% 34-25% 34-25% 24-15% 14-10% 14-10% < 10%
 9 of
18
18
个中
Information 2019, 10, 389 的9
资料 2019,10,389 个
12 of 23
Information 2019, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 23 个中
资料 2019,10，x 供同行评议 的 12 个
3. The Improved TOPSIS Method
改进的 TOPSIS 法
3. The Improved TOPSIS Method
改进的 TOPSIS 法
TOPSIS is a sequential optimization method for the similarity of ideal objectives. It is very e ective TOPSIS is a sequential
optimization method for the similarity of ideal objectives. It is very
TOPSIS 是一种针对理想目标相似性的序贯优化方法。TOPSIS 是一种非常有效的理想目标相似性的序贯优化方法。它是非常
in multieffective-objectiveinmultidecision-objective-makingdecisionanalysis-making[30–analysis33].By [30normalizing–33].Bynormalizingtheoriginalthedataoriginalmatrixdataafter

trends,matrixthecorrespondingaftertrends,thedatacorrespondingmatrixthatdataisnormalizedmatrixthat is establishnormalized,isandestablishtheed,st and theworstbestschemesand

are identifiedworstschemesfrom manyareidentifiedschemesfrom.Then,manytheschemesdistance.Then,betweenthedistanceallindexbetweenvaluesall ofindexeachvaluesevaluationof

通过[30 归一化 -33]对原始数据进行归一化。通过归一化原始矩阵数据在趋势后，对应的趋势后矩阵进行归一化，从而建立归一化后的数据对应矩阵，并从许多已确定的方案中确定出

最优、最优和最差的方案

each evaluation object and the positive and negative ideal solutions are calculated separately; thus, object and the positive and negative ideal
solutions are calculated separately; thus, we can obtain we can obtain the closeness between the evaluation object and the ideal solution, and
the ranking is the closeness between the evaluation object and the ideal solution, and the ranking is the basis for
分别计算每个评价对象和正负理想解，从而分别计算对象和正负理想解，从而得到评价对象和理想解的接近度，排序是评价对象和理想解的接近
度，排序是评价对象和理想解的基础
the basis for evaluating the quality of the object. Because the TOPSIS method uses the relative evaluating the quality of the object. Because the TOPSIS method
uses the relative approximation
评价对象质量的依据。因为 TOPSIS 方法使用的是对物体质量的相对评价。因为 TOPSIS 方法使用的是相对近似
approximation between ideal solutions to arrange the priority order among different schemes, the between ideal solutions to arrange the priority order among di
erent schemes, the TOPSIS method is
理想解之间的近似可以排列不同方案之间的优先级，理想解之间的近似可以排列不同方案之间的优先级
TOPSIS method is improved by referencing the literature to avoid contradictions. A
improved by referencing the literature to avoid contradictions. A two-dimensional data space method two-dimensional data space
method is established by changing the closeness degree between the
参考文献对 TOPSIS 法进行了改进，避免了矛盾。A 通过参考文献来改进避免矛盾。二维数据空间方法二维数据空间方法是通过改变
is established by changing the closeness degree between the final objective and the ideal solution final objective and the ideal solution into all the index
values of the known evaluative objects and the
通过将最终目标与理想解最终目标和理想解之间的密切程度转化为已知评价对象的所有指标值，建立了最终目标与理想解最终目标和理想解之间的密切程度
into alldistancetheindexbetweenvaluestheof thepositiveknownidealevaluativesolutionobjectsandtheandnegativethedistanceideal betweensolution theto relievepositivetheideal

solutioncontradictionandthenegativeanddcreaseideal solutionorderproblemstorelieve.ThetheflowcontradictionchartoftheimprovedanddecreaseTOPSISorderalgorithmproblemsisas.

The flow chartfollowsof the(Figureimproved2): TOPSIS algorithm is as follows (Figure 2):

正、负解决方案之间的理想距离解决正、负解决方案之间的理想距离解决方案之间的矛盾和负解决方案之间的理想距离解决方案之间的矛盾和负解决方案之间的理想距离解决方案之间

的矛盾:

Figure 2. Flow chart of improved technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution.
 图 2。通过与理想解的相似性改进排序偏好技术的流程图。
Figure 2. Flow chart of improved technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution.
图 2。通过与理想解的相似性改进排序偏好技术的流程图。
First, M evaluation objectives are usually established to solve multi-objective optimization
首先，m 评价目标通常被建立来解决多目标优化问题
First, M evaluation objectives are usually established to solve multi-objective optimization problems H1, H2, : : : , Hm, i = 1, 2, 3, : : : , m , and each
object is accompanied by an N evaluation problems H , H , … , H , = 1, 2, 3, … , m , and each object is accompanied by an N evaluation
首先，多目标优化问题 H1，H2，: : ，Hm，i = 1,2,3，: : ，m 通常建立 m 评价目标，每个目标都伴有 n 个评价问题 h，h，... ，h，= 1,2,3，... ，m，
每个目标都伴有 n 个评价问题
indicator X , X , : : : , X , j = 1, 2, 3, : : : , n . Second, relevant experts are invited to grade the evaluative indicator1 2X , X , …n , X , = 1, 2, 3, … , n . Second, relevant experts are invited to grade the evaluative
指标 x，x，: : : ，x，j = 1,2,3，: : ，n。第二，请有关专家对评价指标 12x，x，... n，x，= 1,2,3，... ，n 进行评分。第二，邀请相关专家对评估结果进行评分

indicators (including quantitative and qualitative indicators), and the results are then presented in the indicators (including quantitative and qualitative
indicators), and the results are then presented in
指标(包括定量及定性指标) ，然后把结果载于指标(包括定量及定性指标) ，然后把结果载于
form of a which establishes thefollowing characteristic matrices:
the formmathematicalofmathematrix,tical matrix, which establishes thefollowing characteristic matrices:
形式的数学矩阵，统计矩阵，它建立了以下特征矩阵:

h...11 : H1(...h1.
:: )
H. . . h1j...: : : h1n... H1(...
2 6
11: : H1j..: H1n... 3 7
2 H1
6
3 7

h.
= 6 7= 6 7= ( ) ( ) ( )
h. i h.

X 1 嗨 ,:::, n
hin Hi hj. 1 H. , : : : , ， Xn H.
hi1 : : : hij : : : X Xj ，， (1)
H 6 Hi1: Hij: 欣 7 6 嗨 Hj. 7 1 1 Xj 我 Xn n . (1)
6 7 6 1 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 . . . 7 6 . 7
6 . . . 7 6 . 7
6 7 6 7 h i
6 . . . 7 6 . 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 6
7 7
66
7
7
6 7 6 7

6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6 7
6 7 6
6 7
7

4 5 4 5
hm1 : : : hmj : : : hmn Hm(hm.)
4 hm1: : hmj: : hm54 Hm5
 10 of
18
18 个
Information 2019, 10, 389 中的
资料 2019,10,389 10 个

After establishing the primitive characteristic matrix, follow the below steps for analysis.
建立原始特征矩阵后，按照以下步骤进行分析。
Step 1: Construct a normalized matrix.
步骤 1: 构造一个规范化矩阵。
By using Equation (2), the original matrix is normalized to obtain the corresponding matrix:
通过使用方程(2) ，将原始矩阵归一化以获得相应的矩阵:
hi
你好
R= rij m n, (i = 1, 2, 3, : : : , m; j = 1, 2, 3, : : : , n)
R = rij m n，(i = 1,2,3，: : : ，m; j = 1,2,3，: : : ，n)
hij
rij = s Hij (2)
Rij = s , (2)
m
P 2
h
P h2
ij
Ij

where rij means the value of the i evaluative object on the j index.
其中 rij 表示 j 指数上的 i 值对象的值。
Step 2: The weights obtained by the AHP method are combined with the normalized matrix and
establish the weighted decision matrix A = (A1, A2, : : : , An), j = 1, 2, 3, : : : , n. Multiply the
weight vector A = (A1, A2, : : : , An) obtain a weighted standardization matrix as follows:
第二步: 将层次分析法得到的权重与归一化矩阵相结合，建立加权决策矩阵 a = (A1，A2，: : ，
An) ，j = 1,2,3，: : ，n。乘以权重向量 a = (A1，A2，: : ，An) ，得到如下加权标准化矩阵:
A1h11 : 2 r1j : : : r1n 3
Ajh1j : : :
:: R1j: R1n 3
2 A1h11: : Ajh1j: r11 : : : 7
7

.
7

. 0.7
6

Amh1n .. . 7

..
0.7

A1h11 :
7

. 7
Amh1n 3 2 r11: ... 0.7
7

= 6:: ... Am
7
7 6

7 6 7
7

rin 7. (3)
R 6 A1h11: : h...in r11 : : 第七章

Ajhij : : :
我... 进 : rij : : : 7
7
7
7

6 来了 7 = 6 R11:
7
7 6

6
瑞吉:
.
0.7
. 7

6 阿吉:
0.7

.
7

. 7
0.7
6 . .. 7
7
7

6 .. . 7 6 ... rmn 5
6
6
... . 7 6 第五名
6
6
6
6
7 6 rmj : : :
6
6
6
Ajhmj : : : 7 6 Rmj:
6
6
6
6
6
Ajhmj: . 7 6
4 7 6
A1hm1 : : :
A1hm1: 7 6
7 6
嗯
Amhmn 7
7
7
7
6
6
6

6
收入
rm1
1:: :: :
7 6
7 6
7 6
7 6

5 4
+
Additionally, it is noted that the positive ideal solution R and the negative ideal solution R of
此外，还指出了正理想解 r + 和负理想解 r
all indicators of each evaluative object are
 每个评估对象的所有指标都是

max
rij
R+ = r1+, r2+, r3+, : : : , rn+ , rj+ = Max (4)
R + = r1 + ，r2 + ，r3 + ，: : ，rn + ，rj + = rij , (4)
1 i
m
1im
min r (5)
= = Min r , (5)
, r3 , : : : , rn , 1 i
r1 , r2 rij m ij
R R1，r2 R3: : rn rij 1 i m Ij
where j = 1, 2, 3, : : : , n.
其中 j = 1,2,3: : : ，n。
Step 3: Calculate the distance scale.
第三步: 计算距离刻度。
The distance scale is the distance between the best solution and the worst solution of each scheme.
It can be calculated by the n-dimensional Euclidean distance. Among them, the distance from the
距离尺度是每个方案的最佳解与最差解之间的距离。它可以用 n 维欧几里得度量。其中，距离

scheme to the positive ideal solution R+ is S+, and the distance to the negative ideal solution is S+:
R 是s
到正理想解 r + 的方案是 s + ，到负理想解 r 的距离 + :
Si+ = (6)
Si + = v rij
+
Rij rij
Rij , (6)
tj=1
Tj = 1
u
n

X
Si = (7)
Si = vtj=1 rij
_Rij Ri
rijj . (7)
Tj = 1 u
n

X
+
Moreover, i = 1, 2, 3, : : : , m, and Si is the approaching degree of each evaluation target to
+
the optimal target. When the Si value is smaller, the evaluative target is closer to the optimal target,
and the scheme is better.
此外，i = 1,2,3，: : ，m，Si + 是每个评价目标与最优目标的接近程度。当 Si + 值较小时，评估
目标更接近最佳目标，方案更好。
Step 4: Establish a two-dimensional data space.
步骤 4: 建立一个二维数据空间。
 11 of
18
18 个
Information 2019, 10, 389 中的
资料 2019,10,389 11 个

+
The two-dimensional data space of each evaluation objective (Si , Si ) is established, and the
+
point (Min (Si ), Max (Si )) is set as the optimum reference point A (Figure 3). Calculate the relative
distance between each evaluative object and this point:
建立了各评价目标(Si + ，Si)的二维数据空间，并以 Min (Si +) ，Max (Si)作为最佳参考点 a (图
3)。计算每个评估对象与这一点之间的相对距离:

Ci = r Si+
Si min Si+ + Si max Si (8)
Ci = r + Min Si + 2 + Si Max Si 2 . (8)
Information 2019, 10, x FOR 14 of 23
PEER REVIEW i i 23 个中的 14
资料 2019,10，x 供同行评议 h 我 h 我 个

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the improved technique for order preference by similarity to ideal Figure 3.
Schematic diagram of the improved technique for order preference by similarity to ideal
图 3。通过与理想图 3 的相似性来改进排序偏好技术的示意图。通过与理想的相似性改进的顺序偏好技术的示意图
solution (TOPSIS) method.
求解(TOPSIS)方法。
solution (TOPSIS) method.
求解(TOPSIS)方法。

Step 5:StepAccording5:Accordingtothetothesizesizeof ofthetheCCivalue,ivalue, whenwhen thetheCCi ivaluevalueis issmaller,smaller,thetheevaluativeevaluativeobjectobjectis is

第五步: 根据评价指标的大小，当评价指标越小，评价对象越小，评价对象越小

better;better;that is,thattheis, nearestthenearestpointpointto tothethereferencepoint A is the best..WhenWhenthethedistancedistancebetwbetweenthe

the evaluationevaluationobjectobjectandandthe thereferencepointisisequal, their coordinatescancanbebedirectlycomparedontheon the
当评估对象与参考点之间的距离相等时，它们的坐标可以直接与参考点进行比较

+ ), and the degree of

two- plane the
二 ((平面)of , )和程度
,
S
two-dimensionalplane
(S
(s 的二维平面 of S ), and the degree of the evaluative object
) ，评价对象的程度可以根据
can bejudgedaccording to
to the best principle that +
i thei evaluation object is near
min (
最佳原则是评价对象接近最小值( ) or
)或最大 max ). S
S

) or max
(S
the best principle that the evaluation
(S
评价对象接近最小值(s object is near min )或最大(s ).
最好的原则是 i i S S
4. Numerical Study
数值研究

4. Numerical Study
数值研究
We chose five communities in Wuhu city, namely, Weixing Community, Dongfang Longcheng
我们选择了芜湖市的五个社区，即威兴社区、东方龙城社区
We chose five communities in Wuhu city, namely, Weixing Community, Dongfang Longcheng
我们选择了芜湖市的五个社区，即威兴社区、东方龙城社区
Community, Jinghu Century Community, Chery Bobo Community and Central Community as the
社区，京湖世纪社区，奇瑞波波社区和中心社区作为
Community, Jinghu Century Community, Chery Bobo Community and Central Community as the objects of elderly community assessment suitability. We separately mark these P , P , P , P , and P .
社区、景湖世纪社区、奇瑞波波社区和中心社区作为老年人社区适宜性评价的对象。我们分别标记了这些 p，p，p，p 和 p。
objects of elderly community assessment suitability. We separately mark these P , P , P , P , and P . By using AHP to calculate the weight of each index, the
result of the B-level single1ranking2 3weight4 is 5
老年人社区评估适宜性的对象。我们分别标记这些 p，p，p，p 和 p。通过使用 AHP 来计算每个指标的权重，b 级单一排名 23 权重 4 的结果是 5
By using(0.333,AHP0.183,to calculate0.381,0.103)theT, weightC-level ofsingleeachraindex,king weighttheresultis(0of.151,the0B.575,-level0.274,single0.493,ranking0.137, weight0.37, is
通过使用(0.333，AHP0.183，计算 0.381,0.103) ，单项指标的权重 c 级，国王权重结果为(0.151,0.575,-级 0.274，单项 0.493，排名 0.137，权重 0.37
T
(0.333,0 .0529,.183,0.309,.381,0.162,0.103).493,C0-level.137, 0single.37)T,Cranking-tiertotalweightrankingis weight(0.151, is0.575,(0.038,.274,0.144,0.493,0069,00.137,.123, 00..37,034,0.529,
(0.333,0.0529,0.183,0.309,0.381,0.162,0.103) . 493，c0-level. 137,0 单. 37) t，曲柄级总重量排序为重量(0.151,0.575，(0.038,0.274,0.144,0.493,0069,00.137,0.123,00.37,034,0.529,

0.309,00.093,.162,0.0132,.493,0.077,.137,0.041,.37)0.T123,C-tier0.034,total0.093)rankingT,D-levelweightsingleisranking(0.038, weight0.144, 0069,is(0.493,0.123,0.37,0.034,.137,0.093, 0.183,

0.381,041,.333, 0.103,034,.309,093).529,T 0.162, 0.265, 0.239, 0.372, 0.124, 0.316, 0.421, 0.263, 0.529, 0.309, 0.132, 0.077, 0. 0.123, 0. . , D-level single
ranking weight is (0.493, 0.37, 0.137, 0.183, 0.381, 0.162, 0.75, 0.25, 0.333, 0.667, 0.212, 0.189, 0.518, 0.081, 0.152, 0.371, 0.066, 0.173, 0.142, 0.156, 0.667, 0.333, 0.103, 0.309,
0.529, 0.162, 0.265, 0.239, 0.372, 0.124, 0.316, 0.421, 0.263, 0.529, 0.309, 0.162, 0.75, 0.25, 0.333, 0.137, 0.493, 0.370)T, and D-tier total ranking weight is (0.01, 0.031, 0.011, 0.015,
0.032, 0.028, 0.333, 0.667, 0.212, 0.189, 0.518, 0.081, 0.152, 0.371, 0.066, 0.173, 0.142, 0.156, 0.667, 0.333, 0.137, 0.493, 0T.009, 0.026, 0.044, 0.014, 0.022, 0.020, 0.031, 0.010,
0.026, 0.035, 0.022, 0.044, 0.026, 0.014, 0.063, 0.021, 0.370) , and D-tier total ranking weight is (0.01, 0.031, 0.011, 0.015, 0.032, 0.028, 0.009, 0.026, 0.044, 0.0258, 0.056, 0.018,
0.016, 0.043, 0.007, 0.013, 0.026, 0.006, 0.014, 0.012, 0.013, 0.056, 0.028, 0.011, 0.041, 0.014, 0.022, 0.020, 0.031, 0.010, 0.026, 0.035, 0.022, 0.044, 0.026, 0.014, 0.063, 0.021,
0.0258, 0.056, 0.018,
0.309,00.093,.162,0.0132,.493,0.077、。137,0.041.37)0.t123，c 级 0.034，总计 0.093)排名，d 级权重排名(0.038，权重 0.144,0069，是(0.493,0.123,0.37,0.034。
137,0.093,0.183,0.381,041.333,0.103,034,.309,093)(0.493,0.123,0.37,0.034,0.137,0.093,0.183,0.381,041,0.333,0.103,034,0.309,093).529，t
0.162,0.265,0.239,0.372,0.124,0.316,0.421,0.263,0.529,0.309,0.132,0.077,0.0.123,0..，d 级单项排名权重是
(0.493,0.37,0.137,0.183,0.381,0.162,0.75,0.25,0.3330.6670.2120.1890.5180.0810.1520.371,0.066,0.173,0.142,0.156,0.667,0.333,0.103,0.309,0.5290.1620.2650.2390.3720.1240.316
0.421,0.263,0.529,0.309,0.162,0.75,0.25,0.333,0.137,0.493,0.370)T，d 级总排名权重是
(0.01,0.031,0.011,0.015,0.032,0.028,0.333,0.667,0.2120.1890.5180.0810.1520.3710.0660.173,0.142,0.156,0.667,0.333,0.137,0.493,0T.009,0.026,0.044,0.014,0.022,0.020,0.031,0.01
0,0.026,0.035,0.022,0.044,0.026,0.014,0.063,0.021,0.370)，d 级总排名权重为(0.01,0.031,0.011，0.015,0.032,0.028,0.009,0.026,0.044,0.0258，
0.056,0.018,0.016,0.043,0.007,0.013,0.026,0.006，0.014,0.012,0.013,0.056,0.028,0.011,0.041,0.014，0.022,0.020,0.031,0.010,0.026,0.035,0.022,0.044，
0.026,0.014,0.063,0.021,0.0258,0.056,0.018,
0.031)T.
0.031) t. T
0.016, 0.043, 0.007, 0.013, 0.026, 0.006, 0.014, 0.012, 0.013, 0.056, 0.028, 0.011, 0.041, 0.031) .
0.016,0.043,0.007,0.013,0.026,0.006,0.014,0.012,0.013,0.056,0.028,0.011,0.041,0.031) t.
Based on the calculation of the weights of each indicator, the evaluation should be performed
根据每个指标的权重计算，应该进行评估
Basedaccordingon theothecalculationfollowng stepsofthe. weights of each indicator, the evaluation should be performed
根据每个指标权重的计算步骤，进行评价
accordingSteptothe1: Accfollowingrd tostepsthe.actual situation, each indicator is attributed with the relevant value, as
根据 steptothe1: accfollowinggrd tostepsthe.actual 情况，每个指标都被归因于相关值，如
Stepshown1: AccordingTable9. to the actual situation, each indicator is attributed with the relevant value, as
根据实际情况，每个指标都有相应的值，如
Step 2: Refer to Tables 5–8, 39 indicators corresponding to different evaluation levels. We have shown in Table 9.
步骤 2: 参见表 5-8，对应于不同评估水平的 39 个指标。我们已经在表 9 中显示。
set the scores from e1 to e5 above ( e1 = 1, e2 = 0.75, e3 = 0.5, e4 = 0.25, and e5 = 0). The scoring of
each criterion is processed for numeralization according to five levels as shown in Table 10.
设置分数从 e1 到 e5(e1 = 1，e2 = 0.75，e3 = 0.5，e4 = 0.25，e5 = 0)。每个标准的评分根据表 10 所示
的五个级别进行数字化处理。
Step 3: The normalization matrix of the above indicators is established as shown in Table 11.
步骤 3: 上述指标的归一化矩阵如表 11 所示建立。

1
Information 2019, 10, 389 12 of 18
资讯 2019,10,38912/18

Table 9. The indicator value of the grade evaluation in each residential environment.
表 9。每个住宅环境的评级指标值。
Indicator P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
指示器 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
D1 Very easy Comparatively easy Easy Generally easy Easy
D1 非常简单 相对容易 简单 一般来说很简单 简单
D2 Comparatively satisfied Comparatively satisfied Comparatively satisfied Generally satisfied Generally satisfied
D2 比较满意 比较满意 比较满意 普遍满意 普遍满意
D3 31% 24% 21% 23% 26%
D3 31% 24% 21% 23% 26%
D4 4 mm 4 mm 2 mm 5 mm 1 mm
D4 4 毫米 4 毫米 2 毫米 5 毫米 1 毫米
D5 Completely anti-skid Generally anti-skid Anti-skid Anti-skid Anti-skid
D5 完全防滑 一般是防滑的 防滑 防滑 防滑
D6 Very safe Comparatively safe Comparatively safe Safe Safe
D6 非常安全 相对安全 相对安全 安全 安全
D7 100% 94% 92% 92% 93%
D7 百分百确定 94% 92% 92% 93%
D8 Comparatively safe Generally safe Safe Safe Generally safe
D8 相对安全 基本安全 安全 安全 基本安全
D9 Very easy to use Not easy to use Not easy to use Very easy to use Very easy to use
D9 非常容易使用 不容易使用 不容易使用 非常容易使用 非常容易使用
D10 51% 22% 24% 53% 53%
D10 51% 22% 24% 53% 53%
D11 0.8 mm 7 mm 5 mm 7 mm 8 mm
D11 0.8 毫米 7 毫米 5 毫米 7 毫米 8 毫米
D12 Completely connected Connected Connected Completely connected Generally connected
D12 完全联系在一起 连接 连接 完全联系在一起 通常连接
D13 Generally safe Generally safe Safe Generally safe Generally safe
D13 基本安全 基本安全 安全 基本安全 基本安全
D14 95% 89% 94% 86% 93%
D14 95% 89% 94% 86% 93%
D15 Comparatively suitable Suitable Generally suitable Suitable Suitable
D15 比较合适 合适 一般适合 合适 合适
D16 Completely e ective E ective E ective Comparatively e ective Comparatively e ective
D16 完全有效 有效 有效 相对有效 相对有效
D17 Completely Beautiful Comparatively beautiful Beautiful Generally beautiful Beautiful
D17 完全美丽 比较漂亮 美丽 总的来说很漂亮 美丽
D18 Completely reasonable Reasonable Generally reasonable Completely reasonable Completely reasonable
D18 完全合理 合情合理 一般合理 完全合理 完全合理
D19 Comparatively suitable Not suitable Suitable Suitable Comparatively suitable
D19 比较合适 不合适 合适 合适 比较合适
D20 Identifiable Generally identifiable Generally identifiable Identifiable Identifiable
D20 可识别 一般可识别 一般可识别 可识别 可识别
D21
D21 33 32 71 63 71
D22
D22 20 62 43 27 45
D23 Very good Good Generally good Good Very bad
D23 非常好 很好 总的来说还不错 很好 非常糟糕
D24 Safe Generally safe Dangerous Generally safe Dangerous
D24 安全 基本安全 危险 基本安全 危险
Information 2019, 10, 389 13 of 18
Information 2019,10,38913 of 18

Table 9. Cont.
表 9. 连接。
Indicator P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
指示器 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
D25 One-level Three-level Two-level One-level Two-level
D25 一级 三层 二级 一级 二级
D26
D26 970 490 985 488 487
D27 Comfortable Very uncomfortable Uncomfortable Uncomfortable Uncomfortable
D27 很舒服 非常不舒服 不舒服 不舒服 不舒服
D28 Generally comfortable Uncomfortable Generally comfortable Uncomfortable Uncomfortable
D28 一般都很舒服 不舒服 一般都很舒服 不舒服 不舒服
D29 37% 22% 27% 36% 28%
D29 37% 22% 27% 36% 28%
D30 18 m2 5 m2 18 m2 6 m2 13 m2
D30 18 平方米 5 m25 平方米 18 平方米 6 平方米 13 平方米
D31 24% 19% 17% 18% 11%
D31 24% 19% 17% 18% 11%
D32 Reasonable Very unreasonable Unreasonable Very unreason-able Unreasonable
D32 合情合理 非常不合理 无理取闹 非常不合理 无理取闹
D33 96% 91% 90% 98% 91%
D33 96% 91% 90% 98% 91%
D34 30% 23% 24% 35% 23%
D34 30% 23% 24% 35% 23%
Comparatively
D35 Very complete Complete Comparatively complete Very complete 相对而言
D35 非常完整 完整 比较完整 非常完整
complete
完整
D36 95% 93% 98% 100% 94%
D36 95% 93% 98% 百分百确定 94%
D37 35% 38% 19% 18% 32%
D37 35% 38% 19% 18% 32%
D38 Completely beautiful Beautiful Completely beautiful Completely beautiful Beautiful
D38 非常漂亮 美丽 非常漂亮 非常漂亮 美丽
D39 31% 28% 23% 34% 23%
D39 31% 28% 23% 34% 23%
 14 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 14/18

Step 2: Refer to Tables 5–8, 39 indicators corresponding to di erent evaluation levels. We have
set the scores from e1 to e5 above (e1= 1, e2= 0.75, e3= 0.5, e4= 0.25, and e5= 0). The scoring of
each criterion is processed for numeralization according to five levels as shown in Table 10.
步骤 2: 参见表 5-8，对应于不同评价水平的 39 项指标。我们将得分从 e1 设置为 e5(e1 = 1，e2
= 0.75，e3 = 0.5，e4 = 0.25，e5 = 0)。每个标准的评分根据表 10 所示的五个级别进行数字化处理。

Table 10. Numeralization of the score.

表 10。分数的数字化。

Indicator P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 Indicator P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
指示器 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 指示器 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
D1 D21
D1 1 0.75 0.5 0.25 0.5 D21 0.75 0.75 0 0.25 0
D2 D22
D2 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.25 0.25 D22 1 0 0.5 0.75 0.5
D3 D23
D3 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.75 D23 1 0.75 0.5 0.75 1
D4 D24
D4 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.75 D24 0.75 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.25
D5 D25
D5 1 0.5 0.75 0.75 0.75 D25 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.5 0.75
D6 D26
D6 1 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.5 D26 1 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.75
D7 D27
D7 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 D27 0.75 0 0.25 0.25 0.25
D8 D28
D8 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.25 D28 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.25
D9 D29
D9 1 0.25 0.25 1 1 D29 1 0.25 0.5 1 0.5
D10 D30
D10 1 0.25 0.25 1 1 D30 1 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5
D11 D31
D11 1 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.25 D31 0.75 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.25
D12 D32
D12 1 0.75 0.75 1 0.5 D32 0.75 0 0.25 0 0.25
D13 D33
D13 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.5 0.5 D33 1 0.5 0.5 1 0.5
D14 D34
D14 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.5 D34 1 0.75 0.75 1 0.75
D15 D35
D15 0.75 0.5 0.25 0.5 0.5 D35 1 0.5 0.25 1 0.25
D16 D36
D16 1 0.5 0.5 0.75 0.75 D36 0.75 0.5 0.75 1 0.5
D17 D37
D17 1 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.5 D37 1 1 0.5 0.5 1
D18 D38
D18 1 0.5 0.25 1 1 D38 1 0.5 1 1 0.5
D19 D39
D19 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.75 D39 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.75 0.5
D20
D20 0.5 0.75 0.75 0.5 0.5

Step 3: The normalization matrix of the above indicators is established as shown in Table 11.
步骤 3: 上述指标的归一化矩阵如表 11 所示建立。

Table 11. Normalization processing and optimal-inferior comprehensive data table.

表 11. 归一化处理和最优-次优综合数据表。
 A5
Indicator A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 Indicator A1 A2 A3 A4 答
指示器 A1 A2 A3 A4 答 5 指示器 A1 A2 A3 A4 5
D1 D21
D1 0.686 0.514 0.343 0.171 0.343 D21 0.688 0.688 0 0.229 0
D2 D22
D2 0.557 0.557 0.557 0.186 0.186 D22 0.696 0 0.348 0.522 0.348
D3 D23
D3 0.658 0.329 0.329 0.329 0.493 D23 0.544 0.408 0.272 0.408 0.544
D4 D24
D4 0.365 0.365 0.548 0.365 0.548 D24 0.688 0.459 0.229 0.459 0.229
D5 D25
D5 0.583 0.292 0.438 0.438 0.438 D25 0.507 0.507 0.338 0.338 0.507
D6 D26
D6 0.617 0.463 0.463 0.309 0.309 D26 0.617 0.309 0.463 0.309 0.463
D7 D27
D7 0.707 0.354 0.354 0.354 0.354 D27 0.866 0 0.289 0.289 0.289
D8 D28
D8 0.688 0.229 0.459 0.459 0.229 D28 0.603 0.302 0.603 0.302 0.302
D9 D29
D9 0.566 0.141 0.141 0.566 0.566 D29 0.625 0.156 0.312 0.625 0.312
D10 D30
D10 0.566 0.141 0.141 0.566 0.566 D30 0.784 0.196 0.392 0.196 0.392
D11 D31
D11 0.834 0.209 0.417 0.209 0.209 D31 0.64 0.426 0.426 0.426 0.213
D12 D32
D12 0.544 0.408 0.408 0.544 0.272 D32 0.905 0 0.302 0 0.302
D13 D33
D13 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.4 D33 0.603 0.302 0.302 0.603 0.302
D14 D34
D14 0.688 0.229 0.459 0.229 0.459 D34 0.521 0.391 0.391 0.521 0.391
D15 D35
D15 0.64 0.426 0.213 0.426 0.426 D35 0.649 0.324 0.162 0.649 0.162
D16 D36
D16 0.617 0.309 0.309 0.463 0.463 D36 0.463 0.309 0.463 0.617 0.309
D17 D37
D17 0.686 0.171 0.343 0.514 0.343 D37 0.535 0.535 0.267 0.267 0.535
D18 D38
D18 0.549 0.275 0.137 0.549 0.549 D38 0.535 0.267 0.535 0.535 0.267
D19 D39
D19 0.577 0.192 0.385 0.385 0.577 D39 0.507 0.507 0.338 0.507 0.338
D20
D20 0.365 0.548 0.548 0.365 0.365

Step 4: The weights of each indicator are combined with the normalized matrix, a weighted
decision matrix is established (e.g., Table 12), and the optimum and worst values of all indicators of
each evaluation object are identified.
步骤 4: 将每个指标的权重与归一化矩阵相结合，建立一个加权决策矩阵(如表 12) ，并确定每个
评价对象的所有指标的最佳值和最差值。
 15 of
18
18 个
Information 2019, 10, 389 中的
资料 2019,10,389 15 个

Table 12. Weighted decision table and optimal-inferior comprehensive data table.
表 12. 加权决策表和最优-次优综合数据表。
Indicator A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 Indicator A1 A2 A3 A4 A5
指示器 A1 A2 A3 A4 答5 指示器 A1 A2 A3 A4 答5
D1 D21
D1 0.028 0.021 0.014 0.007 0.014 D21 0.043 0.043 0.000 0.014 0.000
D2 D22
D2 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.006 0.006 D22 0.015 0.000 0.007 0.011 0.007
D3 D23
D3 0.007 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 D23 0.015 0.011 0.008 0.011 0.015
D4 D24
D4 0.005 0.005 0.008 0.005 0.008 D24 0.039 0.026 0.013 0.026 0.013
D5 D25
D5 0.019 0.009 0.014 0.014 0.014 D25 0.009 0.009 0.006 0.006 0.009
D6 D26
D6 0.017 0.013 0.013 0.009 0.009 D26 0.010 0.005 0.007 0.005 0.007
D7 D27
D7 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 D27 0.037 0.000 0.012 0.012 0.012
D8 D28
D8 0.018 0.006 0.012 0.012 0.006 D28 0.004 0.002 0.004 0.002 0.002
D9 D29
D9 0.025 0.006 0.006 0.025 0.025 D29 0.008 0.002 0.004 0.008 0.004
D10 D30
D10 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.008 0.008 D30 0.020 0.005 0.010 0.005 0.010
D11 D31
D11 0.018 0.005 0.009 0.005 0.005 D31 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.001
D12 D32
D12 0.011 0.008 0.008 0.011 0.005 D32 0.013 0.000 0.004 0.000 0.004
D13 D33
D13 0.012 0.012 0.019 0.012 0.012 D33 0.007 0.004 0.004 0.007 0.004
D14 D34
D14 0.007 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.005 D34 0.007 0.005 0.005 0.007 0.005
D15 D35
D15 0.017 0.011 0.006 0.011 0.011 D35 0.036 0.018 0.009 0.036 0.009
D16 D36
D16 0.022 0.011 0.011 0.016 0.016 D36 0.013 0.009 0.013 0.017 0.009
D17 D37
D17 0.015 0.004 0.008 0.011 0.008 D37 0.006 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.006
D18 D38
D18 0.024 0.012 0.006 0.024 0.024 D38 0.022 0.011 0.022 0.022 0.011
D19 D39
D19 0.015 0.005 0.010 0.010 0.015 D39 0.016 0.016 0.010 0.016 0.010
D20
D20 0.005 0.008 0.008 0.005 0.005

That is, the best scheme is:

也就是说，最好的方案是:

+
R = (0.028, 0.017, 0.007, 0.008, 0.019, 0.017, 0.006, 0.018, 0.025, 0.008, 0.018, 0.011, 0.019, 0.007,
0.017, 0.022, 0.015, 0.024, 0.015, 0.008, 0.043, 0.015, 0.015, 0.039, 0.009, 0.010, 0.037, 0.004, 0.008,
0.020, 0.004, 0.013, 0.007, 0.007, 0.036, 0.017, 0.006, 0.022, 0.016) T.
R+=
(0.028,0.017,0.007,0.008,0.019,0.017,0.006,018,025,0008,018,011,019,0007,017,0.0220.0150.0240.0150.
0080.0430.0150.015,0.0390.0090.0100.0370.0040.0080.0200.004,0.013、0.007、0.007、0.036、0.017、

0.006、0.022、0.016)T.
 The worst scheme is:
最糟糕的计划是:

R = (0.007, 0.006, 0.004, 0.005, 0.009, 0.009, 0.003, 0.006, 0.006, 0.002, 0.005, 0.005, 0.012, 0.002,
= (0.007,0.006,0.004,0.005,0.009,0.009,0.003,0.006,0.006,0.002,0.005,0.012,0.002,
0.006, 0.011, 0.004, 0.006, 0.005, 0.005, 0.000, 0.000, 0.008, 0.013, 0.006, 0.005, 0.000, 0.002,
006,0.011,0.004,0.006,0.005,0.000,0.000,0.008,0.013,0.006,0.005,0.000,0.002,
T
0.002, 0.005, 0.001, 0.000, 0.004, 0.005, 0.009, 0.009, 0.003, 0.011, 0.010) .
0.002,0.005,0.001,0.000,0.004,0.005,0.009,0.009,0.003,0.011,0.010) t.
Step 5: According to the best and worst value, the distance between each scheme and the
+
best and worst solution is calculated. That is, the best solution is S = (0.008, 0.065, 0.076, 0.056,
T T
0.073) . The worst scheme is S = (0.089, 0.051, 0.028, 0.051, 0.036) .
第五步: 根据最佳和最差值，计算每个方案与最佳和最差解之间的距离。也就是说，最好的解是
s + = (0.008,0.065,0.076,0.056,0.073) t。最差的方案是 s = (0.089,0.051,0.028,0.051,0.036) t。
Step 6: According to Equation (8), the relative distance between each evaluation scheme and
the point and ranked variables are calculated. Thus, according to the establishment of the two-
dimensional data space map, and the relevant formula steps, the relative distance between the
evaluation scheme and the point is calculated as Ci = (0, 0.069, 0.091, 0.061, 0.084).
第六步: 根据方程式(8) ，计算各评价方案与点和排序变量之间的相对距离。因此，根据二维数据
空 间 图 的 建 立 和 相 应 的 公 式 步 骤 ， 计 算 出 评 价 方 案 与 点 的 相 对 距 离 为 Ci =
(0,0.069,0.091,0.061,0.084)。
The five housing estates are ordered according to the TOPSIS evaluative value: P 1 > P4 > P2 > P5
五个屋苑根据 TOPSIS 评估值排序: P1 > P4 > P2 > P5
> P3. From this, we can observe that Weixing Community (P1) is the best livable community that is
suitable for elderly living and outdoor activities. Whether it is the road environment, site environment or
landscape greening, Weixing Community is more consistent with the behavioral characteristics and
P3.由此可见，威兴社区(P1)是最适合长者生活和户外活动的宜居社区。无论是道路环境、场地环境还是景观绿化，卫星社区都更符

合行为特征

activity needs of elderly people. Compared with Weixing Community, Jinghu Century Community (P 3)
and Central Community (P5) perform poorly in the aspect of community environment that suits the elderly.
Jinghu Century Community has viaducts, trains and a high noise pollution ratio around its area, which has
a certain impact on the outdoor activities of elderly people, while Central Community is located south of
Wuhu City, which is developed. Because of the high cost of real estate development,
长者的活动需求。与威兴社区相比，景湖世纪社区(P3)和中央社区(P5)在适合老年人的社区环境方面表现
较差。景湖世纪社区周边地区高架铁路、高噪声污染严重，对老年人的户外活动产生了一定的影响，而中
心社区位于经济发达的芜湖市南部。由于房地产开发的高成本,
the area of the community infield is limited, and there are fewer activities for elderly people, which do not
meet the needs of outdoor activities of elderly people. Oriental Longcheng Community (P 2) is located
west of Wuhu City, near Tingtang Park, Wuhu. It has a good ecological environment. The site
environment and green space environment can meet the needs of elderly activities. However, the road
社区内野面积有限，老年人活动较少，不能满足老年人户外活动的需要。东方龙城社区(P2)位于芜湖市西
部，靠近 Tingtang 公园，芜湖。它拥有良好的生态环境。场地环境和绿地环境能够满足老年人活动的需要。
然而，道路呢
 16 of
18
18 个
Information 2019, 10, 389 中的
资料 2019,10,389 16 个

tra c environment in the community is general, which fails to achieve the continuity of accessible tra
c and does not meet the needs of elderly people who move with a wheelchair. In the space layout of
the site, the reasonable layout of dynamic and static zones is not fully considered.
社区交通环境普遍欠佳，未能实现无障碍交通的连续性，亦未能满足长者使用轮椅的需要。在场地的
空间布局中，没有充分考虑动态和静态区域的合理布局。
Next, we use the traditional TOPSIS method to evaluate the suitability of five communities: The
traditional TOPSIS method is to calculate the distance according to Equation (9), then the
evaluation objects are sorted from large to small, where the bigger C i is, the better the overall
benefit. The calculation is as follows:
其次，采用传统的 TOPSIS 方法对五个群落进行适宜性评价: 传统的 TOPSIS 方法是根据公式(9)
计算距离，然后将评价对象从大到小进行排序，Ci 越大，综合效益越好。计算方法如下:
Si
Si
Ci = + . (9)
Ci = + . (9)

Si + Si
Si + Si
The result is Ci = (0.918, 0.440, 0.270, 0.477, 0.330). The evaluation results are consistent
with the improved TOPSIS: P1 > P4 > P2 > P5 > P3.
结果是 Ci = (0.918,0.440,0.270,0.477,0.330)。评估结果与改进的 TOPSIS 一致: P1 > P4 > P2 >
P5 > P3。
The reasons for using the improved TOPSIS approach is that the improved TOPSIS considers
the relative closeness degree of each evaluation object to the best and worst plan. Referring to the
literature and examples, the disadvantage of using the traditional TOPSIS method is that the best
solution and the worst solution of the decision-making scheme may change when new decision-
making schemes are added, which leads to the reverse order of our ranking. If there are two
+ +
evaluation objects about point A and point C symmetry, we have S 1 = S2 and S1 = S2 , and if
using the traditional TOPSIS method, the result will conclude that the two evaluation objects are of
the same quality; however, this is not the case [28,29].
使用改进的 TOPSIS 方法的原因是改进的 TOPSIS 考虑了每个评估对象与最佳和最差计划的相
对接近程度。参考文献和实例，利用传统的 TOPSIS 方法的不足之处在于，当加入新的决策方案时，
决策方案的最优解和最差解可能会发生变化，从而导致排序的逆序。如果 a 点和 c 点的对称性有两个
评价对象，我们得到 S1 + = S2 + 和 S1 = S2，如果使用传统的 TOPSIS 方法，结果将得出两个评价
对象具有相同的性质，但情况并非如此[28,29]。
In order to increase the sensitivity of the data, we use the osculating value method to validate
our model, and its Ci-value equation is
为了提高数据的灵敏度，我们采用密切值法对模型进行了验证，其 ci 值方程为
S+
S+ S
i i
max(
Ci = min(S+) S
分钟(s 最大 (10)
Ci = +) (s ) . (10)
i i
The result is Ci = (0, 7.552, 9.185, 6.427, 8.721). The principle of this method is to treat the
positive and negative indexes in the same direction and calculate the distance between the
evaluation object and the best and worst point, respectively. The closer the distance, the better the
e ect of the evaluation object. So, we come to the same conclusion as the above model; that is, P 1 >
P4 > P2 > P5 > P3. The validity of the evaluation results has been further proved.
结果是 Ci = (0,7.552,9.185,6.427,8.721)。该方法的原理是在同一方向上对正负指标进行处理，
分别计算评价对象与最佳点和最差点之间的距离。距离越近，评价对象的效果越好。因此，我们得出
了与上述模型相同的结论，即，P1 > P4 > P2 > P5 > P3。评估结果的有效性得到了进一步证明。

5. Conclusions
5. 结论

The assessment of community environment suitability is the basis of urban residential

environment planning for the environment of the aging population in China. This article established
an indicator system of the suitability for elderly people of a community from the four dimensions of
site environment, road environment, greening environment and ecological environment to achieve a
comprehensive assessment, as well as to use AHP to empower the indicators at all levels. On this
basis, we use an improved TOPSIS method to make a comprehensive and objective assessment of
the community’s adaptability to old age. Finally, by taking five communities in Wuhu Community as
an example, the evaluative index system and evaluative method of aging adaptability were applied.
The results of this study can provide theoretical and methodological support for the assessment of a
community’s adaptability to elderly persons in various urban areas in China. The applied research
results can help relevant departments and consumers understand the advantages and
disadvantages of the community environment in ageing habitations and help them to make relevant
decisions. The improved TOPSIS method improves the accuracy of the evaluation results and other
countries or similar problems can also be calculated and proved using the model.
社区环境适宜性评价是中国城市人口老龄化环境居住环境规划的基础。本文从场地环境、道路环
境、绿化环境和生态环境四个维度建立了社区老年人适宜性评价指标体系，对社区老年人适宜性进行
了综合评价，并运用层次分析法对各层次的指标赋权。在此基础上，我们使用改进的 TOPSIS 方法对
社区的老年适应性进行全面和客观的评估。最后，以芜湖社区五个社区为例，应用老龄化适应性评价
指标体系和评价方法。这项研究的结果可以提供理论和方法上的支持，以评估社区的适应性老年人在
不同的城市地区在中国。应用研究结果可以帮助相关部门和消费者了解社区环境在老年人居住环境中
的优势和劣势，并帮助他们做出相关决策。改进的 TOPSIS 方法提高了评价结果的准确性，其他国家
或类似问题也可以使用该模型进行计算和证明。
Our study has established a more comprehensive evaluation system and the use of an improved
TOPSIS method, so that our evaluation results are more accurate. However, for the elderly community,
an environmental suitability assessment is a long-term process; we can consider more factors in future
research. In addition, the improved TOPSIS method improves the reliability of our assessment results
我们的研究建立了一个更全面的评估系统，并使用改进的 TOPSIS 方法，使我们的评估结果更准确。
然而，对于老年社区来说，环境适宜性评估是一个长期的过程; 我们可以在未来的研究中考虑更多的因素。
此外，改进的 TOPSIS 方法提高了我们评估结果的可靠性
 17 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 17/18

but is inevitably flawed. Therefore, in the extension research, we may use several kinds of models
to carry out the comparison and the verification of our computation, thus causing our conclusion to
be more perfect.
但不可避免地存在缺陷。因此，在可拓学研究中，我们可以使用多种模型对计算结果进行比较和验证，
从而使我们的结论更加完善。

Author Contributions: S.-C.Z., H.W. and Z.L. conceived, designed, and wrote the manuscript; S.Z. and Y.J.
contributed significantly to the analysis and manuscript preparation; S.Z. and Z.L. performed the model
analyses and wrote the manuscript; S.Z. and T.B. helped perform the analysis with constructive discussions; all
authors read and approved the manuscript.
作者贡献: s.c.z. 、 h.w. 和 z.l 构思、设计和撰写了手稿; s.z. 和 y.j 对分析和手稿准备作出了重要贡献; s.z. 和
z.l 进行了模型分析并撰写了手稿; s.z. 和 t.b. 通过建设性讨论帮助进行了分析; 所有作者都阅读和批准了手稿。
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province, China (No.
1608085QG168 and No. AHSKQ20182018D08), the Youth Fund Project of Humanities and social sciences of
the Ministry of Education (No. 18YJC630110), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2018QN058),
Major Humanities and Social Sciences Research Projects in Zhejiang Universities (No. 2018QN058) and
Ningbo Natural Science Foundation (No. 2019A610037). And the APC was funded by the Natural Science Key
Research Project of Anhui Province, China (No. KJ2018A0115).
资金来源: 本研究由中国安徽省国家自然科学基金 (编号: 1608085qg168 和编号: 1608085QG168)资助。
AHSKQ20182018D08)、教育部人文社会科学青年基金项目(编号: 18YJC630110)、中国博士后科学基金会(编号:
2018QN058)、浙江省高校人文社会科学重点研究项目 (编号: 2018QN058)和宁波市自然科学基金会(编号:
2019A610037)。该项目由中国安徽省自然科学重点研究项目资助。KJ2018A0115).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the
design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in
the decision to publish the results.
利益冲突: 作者声明没有利益冲突。创始赞助商在研究的设计、数据的收集、分析或解释、手稿的撰写或发表结
果的决定中没有任何作用。

References
参考文献

1.He, L.-H.; Wei, G. Problems and Countermeasures of outdoor environment’s adaptability for elderly in
existing communities. Planner 2015, 11, 23–28.
现有社区老年人户外环境适应性存在的问题及对策。规划师 2015,11,23-28。
2. The 13th Five-Year Plan of the State Council for the Development of the Aging Cause and the Construction of
the Pension System [R/OL] the State Council, 6 March 2017 [26 July 2019]. Available online: http:
//www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2017-03/06-/content_5173930.htm (accessed on 26 July 2019).
国务院发展老龄事业和建设养老保险制度第十三个五年规划[ r/OL ]国务院，2017 年 3 月 6 日[2019 年 7 月 26 日]。可在
线查阅: http://www.gov. cn/zhengce/content/2017-03/06-/content _ 5173930.htm (2019 年 7 月 26 日访问)。
3. Song, Y.; Lv, K.Y.; Wang, L. Innovation of China’s Old-age Pension Model under the New Normal. Tax.
Econ. 2019, 32, 21–28. (In Chinese)
宋，y; 吕，k.y; 王，l。新常态下中国养老金模式的创新。税收。经济。2019,32,21-28.(中文)
4. Cao, R.; Bai, G.R.; Wang, L. Study on Ecological Location of House in Cites. Hum. Geogr. 2004, 19, 13–16.
Cao，r. ; Bai，g.r. ; Wang，l. 城市住宅生态定位研究。哼。Geogr.2004,19,13-16.
5. Rostron, R.B.J. Site Planning and Design for the Elderly: Issues, Guidelines, and Alternatives by Diane Y.
Carstens. Town Plan. Rev. 1994, 65, 333–334. [CrossRef]
Rostron，r.b.j。老年人的场地规划和设计: 问题，指导方针和选择作者: Diane y。城市规划。1994 年修订，
65,333-334。[交叉参考]
6. Salzano, E. Seven aims for the livable city. In Proceedings of the International Making Cities Livable
Conferences, Carmel, CA, USA, 15–19 April 1997; Gondolier Press: Southampton, NY, USA, 1997; pp. 18–20.
萨尔扎诺，e。七个目标为宜居的城市。《国际城市宜居会议汇编》 ，美国加利福尼亚州卡梅尔，1997 年 4 月 15 日至
19 日; 贡多利尔出版社: 美国纽约州南安普敦，1997 年; 第 18 至 20 页。
7. Douglass, M. Globalization, Intercity Competition and the Rise of Civil Society: Towards Livable Cities in
PaciWc Asia. Asian J. Soc. Sci. 2002, 30, 129–149. [CrossRef]
Douglass，m。《全球化，城市间竞争和公民社会的崛起: 走向亚太地区的宜居城市》(PaciWc Asia)。亚洲 j。
科学。2002,30,129-149.[ CrossRef ]
8.Peter, E. Political strategies for more livable cities: Lessons from six cases of development and political
transition. City Rev. 2001, 5, 203–229.
更宜居城市的政治战略: 六个发展和政治过渡案例的经验教训。City rev. 2001,5,203-229 City rev. 2001,5,203-
229.
9. Harver, C.; Aultman-Hall, L. Measuring urban streetscapes for livability: A review of approaches. Prof.
Geogr. 2016, 68, 149. [CrossRef]
测量城市街道景观的宜居性: 方法评述。 Geogr. 2016,68,149
10. Wu, L.-F. We should actively create the subject of human settlements environment. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci.
2006, 21, 442–443.
吴老师，林老师。积极创建人居环境学科。公牛。阿成。阿卡德。科学。2006,21,442-443.
11. Qu, J.-Y. Study on the Establishment of Urban Elderly Residential Environment Assessment Scale-A
Survey Based on Beijing. Res. Aging Sci. 2017, 12, 3–17.
Qu，j-y.城市老年人居住环境评价量表编制研究——基于北京的调查。有关资料。衰老科学。2017,12,3-17.
12. He, L.-H.; Wei, G. Built community environment renovation for senior people. Planners 2015, 11, 23–28.
何丽海; 魏，g。为老年人建设社区环境改造。规划师 2015,11,23-28。
13. Li, T. Retirement life issue in community restructuring: Zhongguancun case. Planners 2014, 2, 96–101.
Li，t。社区重组中的退休生活问题: Zhongguancun 案例。 Planners 2014,2,96-101。
14. Wu, T.; Tang, X.-M. Study on the Construction of Supportive Evaluation Index System for Outside
Environmental Rehabilitation of Senior Apartments. J. SJTU (Agric. Sci. Ed.) 2013, 21, 89–94. (In Chinese)
唐旭明。老年公寓外部环境修复支持性评价指标体系构建研究。上海交通大学。Sci.教育版 2013,21,89-94.(中文)
15. Sang, C.; Wu, G.C.; Sun, L.; Wang, S.C. Research on evaluation system of age-friendly city construction.
Shanghai Urban Plan. Rev. 2018, 5, 83–86.
Sang，c。 ; Wu，g.c。 ; Sun，l。 ; Wang，s.c. 友好型城市建设评价体系研究。上海城市规划。2018,5,83-86.
16. Yu, W.-Y.; Hu, H. Research on the evaluation index system of urban leisure Greenland adaptability for
the elderly. For. Resour. Manag. 2018, 4, 69–75.
老年人城市休闲绿地适应性评价指标体系研究。他说。资源。管理。2018,4,69-75.
17. Gupta, H. Assessing organizations performance on the basis of GHRM practices using BWM and Fuzzy
TOPSIS. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 226, 201–226. [CrossRef]
Gupta，h。使用 BWM 和 Fuzzy TOPSIS 基于 GHRM 实践评估组织绩效。J. 环境。Manag 管理。
2018,226,201-226.[ CrossRef ]
18. Rezaei, J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 2015, 53, 49–57. [CrossRef]
最佳最差多标准决策方法。欧米茄 2015,53,49-57。[ CrossRef ]
19. Panmucar, D.; Deveci, M.; Faith, C.; Darko, B. A fuzzy Full Consistency Method-Dombi-Bonferroni model for
priorititizing transportation demand management measures. Appl. Soft Comput. 2019, 87, 105952. [CrossRef]
Panmucar，d. ; Deveci，m. ; Faith，c. ; Darko，b.模糊完全一致性方法 -dombi-bonferroni 模型用于优先运输需求管理
措施。应用。软计算。2019,87,105952.[ CrossRef ]
 18 of
Information 2019, 10, 389 18
资料 2019,10,389 18/18

20. Eghbali-Zarch, M.; Tavakkoli-Moghaddama, R.; Esfahanian, F.; Sepehri, M.M.; Azaron, A.
Pharmacological therapy selection of type 2 diabetes based on the SWARA and modified MULTIMOORA
methods under a fuzzy environment. Artif. Intell. Med. 2018, 87, 20–33. [CrossRef]
Eghbali-Zarch，m. ; Tavakkoli-Moghaddama，r. ; Esfahanian，f. ; Sepehri，M.m. ; Azaron，a. 模糊环境下基
于 SWARA 和改良 MULTIMOORA 方法的 2 型糖尿病药物治疗选择。Artif.英特尔。医学。2018,87,20-
33.[ CrossRef ]
21. Mardani, A.; Nilashi, M.; Zakuan, N.; Loganathan, N.; Soheilirad, S.; Saman, M.Z.M.; Ibrahim, O. A
systematic review and meta-Analysis of SWARA and WASPAS methods: Theory and applications with
recent fuzzy developments. Appl. Soft Comput. 2017, 57, 265–292. [CrossRef]
Mardani，a. ; Nilashi，m. ; Zakuan，n. ; Loganathan，n. ; Soheilirad，s. ; Saman，M.z.m. ; Ibrahim，
o.SWARA 和 WASPAS 方法的系统综述和荟萃分析: 理论和应用与最近的模糊发展。应用程序。软计算。
2017,57,265-292.[ CrossRef ]
22. Xiao, L.-L.; Zhong, L.-S.; Yu, H.; Zhou, R. Study on Suitability Evaluation of Recreation Utilization in
Qianjiangyuan National Park System Pilot Area under Functional Constraints. Acta Ecol. Sin. 2019, 39,
1375–1384.
功能约束下的黔江原国家公园系统试验区游憩利用适宜性评价研究。Acta Ecol.罪恶。2019,39,1375-1384.
23. Leszko, M. Better with age: The psychology of successful aging. J. Women Aging 2019, 30, 363–364. [CrossRef]
Leszko，M.Better with age: The psychology of successful Aging. j. Women Aging 2019,30,363-364. [ CrossRef ]
24. Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural Construction “Announcement on Publishing National Standard
‘Code for Design of Residential Buildings for the Elderly’” [R/OL] Ministry of Housing, Urban and Rural
Construction. 25 October 2016 [26 July 2019]. Available online: http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/-201703/
t20170321_231094.html (accessed on 26 July 2019).
住房、城乡建设部“关于出台《老年住宅设计规范》国家标准的公告”[ r/OL ]住房、城乡建设部。2016 年 10 月 25
日[2019 年 7 月 26 日]。可在线查阅: http://www.mohurd. gov. cn/wjfb/-201703/t20170321 _ 231094. html
(2019 年 7 月 26 日访问)。
25. Wang, Q. Needs and Influencing Factors of Home-based Elderly Care Services in Urban Communities:-
based on National Survey Data of Urban Elderly Population. Popul. Stud. 2016, 32, 98–112.
Wang，q。城市社区家庭老年护理服务的需求和影响因素:-基于全国城市老年人口调查数据。人口。Stud 种马。
2016,32,98-112.
26. Li, X.-Y. The Development of Retirement Community in Foreign Countries and Its Enlightenment to the
Construction of Elderly Community in China. Urban Stud. 2018, 201, 86–93.
李，x-y。国外养老社区的发展及其对中国老年社区建设的启示。城市种马。2018,201,86-93.
27. Yu, J.-R.; Shing, W.-Y. Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: An Integrated
Fuzzy Logarithmic Preference Programming. Appl. Soft Comput. J. 2013, 13, 1792–1799. [CrossRef]
余永利; 成伟业。模糊层级分析法与网络分析法: 一种集成的模糊对数偏好规划。应用程序。软计算。
2013,13,1792-1799.[ CrossRef ]
28. Cui, C.-Q.; Wang, B.; Zhao, Y.-X.; Wang, Q.; Sun, Z.-M. China’s regional sustainability assessment on
mineral resources: Results from an improved analytic hierarchy process-based normal cloud model. J.
Cleaner Prod. 2019, 210, 105–120. [CrossRef]
崔世安; 王世安; 赵世安; 王世安; 孙世安。中国区域矿产资源可持续性评估: 改进的基于层次分析法的正常云模型
的结果。清洁产品。2019,210,105-120.[ CrossRef ]
29. Feng, L.; Zhao, J. Study on urban park landscape quality evaluation based on AHP-TOPSIS combined
model. J. Shandong Agric. Univ. (Sci. Ed.) 2018, 49, 777–781. (In Chinese)
Feng，l. ; Zhao，j. 基于 AHP-TOPSIS 组合模型的城市公园景观质量评价研究。山东农业。科学院。教育
2018,49,777-781.(中文)
30. Liu, D.; Qi, X.-C.; Fu, Q.; Li, M.; Zhu, W.-F.; Zhang, L.-L.; Faiz, M.A.; Khan, M.I.; Li, T.-X.; Cui, S. A Resilience
Evaluation Method for a Combined Regional Agricultural Water and Soil Resource System based on Weighted
Mahalanobis Distance and a Gray-TOPSIS Model. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 667–679. [CrossRef]
刘，d; Qi，x-c; Fu，q; Li，m; Zhu，w.f. ; Zhang，l-l; Faiz，ma; Khan，mi; Li，t-x; Cui，s。基于加权马氏距离和灰色
topsis 模型的区域农业水土资源系统复原力评价方法。清洁。Prod.2019,229,667-679.[ CrossRef ]
31. Tang, J.; Zhu, H.-L.; Liu, Z.; Jia, F.; Zheng, X.-X. Urban Sustainability Evaluation under the Modifified
TOPSIS Based on Grey Relational Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 256. [CrossRef]
唐，j; 朱，h. 1; 刘，z; 贾，f; 郑，x-x。基于灰色关联分析的改进 TOPSIS 法的城市可持续性评价。内景。环境。
保护区。公共卫生 2019,16,256。[ CrossRef ]
32. Chen, W. On the inverse order problem in the application of TOPSIS method and its elimination. Oper.
Plan. Manag. 2005, 5, 53–57.
关于 TOPSIS 方法应用中的逆序问题及其消除。歌剧。计划。管理。2005,5,53-57.
33. Ren, L.-F.; Wang, Y.-R.; Zhang, Y.-Q.; Sun, Z.-Q. Improvement and comparative study of Topsis method.
Health Stat. China 2008, 1, 64–66. (In Chinese)
Ren，l.f; Wang，y.r; Zhang，y.q; Sun，z-q.Topsis 方法的改进和比较研究。健康统计。China 2008,1,64-66 中
国 2008,1,64-66。(中文)

' 2019 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
2019 年作者。持牌人 MDPI，瑞士巴塞尔。本文是根据知识共享署名(CC BY)许可协议
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY/4.0/)的条款和条件发布的开放访问文章。