# An Integrated Decision Support Model for Evaluating Public Transport Quality
## 3 Results and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factor** & **Decision Maker** & **Weight** & **Rank** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C1} & Passengers & 0.2076 & 3 \\  & Public Transport Experts & 0.1188 & 4 \\  & Municipal Officials & 0.3473 & 1 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C2} & Passengers & 0.3559 & 1 \\  & Public Transport Experts & 0.2654 & 2 \\  & Municipal Officials & 0.2771 & 2 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C3} & Passengers & 0.1995 & 4 \\  & Public Transport Experts & 0.3754 & 1 \\  & Municipal Officials & 0.191 & 3 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C4} & Passengers & 0.2371 & 2 \\  & Public Transport Experts & 0.2404 & 3 \\ \cline{1-1}  & Municipal Officials & 0.1846 & 4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: The final weights and level ranks for the factors in the first level. Table 8 demonstrates the results of the evaluator groups in level 2. The combined AHP-BWM model was applied due to three (\(3\times 3\)) matrices (AHP) and one (\(5\times 5\)) matrix (BWM). Level 2 results exhibit this phenomenon more explicitly (see Table 7). \"Mental comfort C23\" has the priority as it is ranked on the first position to be improved for the three groups. Reference [39] worked on the safety of public transportation in developing countries to improve it by conducting a specific agenda. This underlines the necessity of reorganizing the public bus network in the city, or might hint on examining the drivers' behavior of public buses and on initiating the training of drivers to avoid and minimize the safety of travel issues, and accordingly, the mental comfort for the passengers will be improved. While \"Discounted tickets for pensioners or students C43\" has the priority to be improved from the passengers' evaluation perspective, \"Directness C12\" is the second priority for municipal officials improve (second place in level 2), due to their belief that this criterion will raise the demand on public buses in the city. \"Info before travel C32\" has the second position for public transport experts (Figure 4); the experts believe that initiating a new mobile application to let the traveler know more information about the journey will raise the reliability and demand on public transportation above the current situation. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Passengers**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Public Transport Experts**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Municipal Officials**} \\ \cline{2-10}
**Criteria** & \multirow{2}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Weight** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Final** \\ **Weight** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Rank** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Weight** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\ \begin{tabular}{c} **Final** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{ \begin{tabular}{c} **Rank** \\ **Score** \\ \end{tabular}  } \\ \hline C11 & 0.0906 & 0.0188 & 13 & 0.1176 & 0.014 & 13 & 0.0909 & 0.0316 & 11 \\ C12 & 0.1087 & 0.0226 & 12 & 0.1961 & 0.02  
The application of AHP-BWM model resulted in more consistent weights, facilitating the completion of prepared questionnaires for the decision makers. Table 9 presents the stakeholder results for level three in the sequence (passengers, public transport experts, and municipal officials). For the third level and from the municipal officials' preferences, the model results showed \"Fit connection (C122)\" as the most significant supply quality factor related to public transportation. This result can be justified as that connection between bus lines and routes, or between buses and other types of public modes are essential to ensure the directness of the system [40], although \"Frequency of lines (C131)\" is the most significant criterion that needs improvement from the passengers' point of view.