Pairwise opposite matrix and its cognitive prioritization operators: comparisons with pairwise reciprocal matrix and analytic prioritization operators

被引:39
作者
Yuen, K. K. F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Zirve Univ, Dept Business Adm, TR-27260 Gaziantep, Turkey
关键词
decision analysis; utility theory; analytic hierarchy/network process (AHP/ANP); cognitive decision system; optimization; GOAL PROGRAMMING METHOD; HIERARCHY PROCESS; EIGENVALUE METHOD; WEIGHTS;
D O I
10.1057/jors.2011.33
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The pairwise reciprocal matrix (PRM) of the analytic hierarchy/network process has been investigated by many scholars. However, there are significant queries about the appropriateness of using the PRM to represent the pairwise comparison. This research proposes a pairwise opposite matrix (POM) as the ideal alternative with respect to the human linguistic cognition of the rating scale of the paired comparison. Several cognitive prioritization operators (CPOs) are proposed to derive the individual utility vector (or priority vector) of the POM. Not only are the rigorous mathematical proofs of the new models demonstrated, but solutions of the CPOs are also illustrated by the presentation of graph theory. The comprehensive numerical analyses show how the POM performs better than the PRM. POM and CPOs, which correct the fallacy of the PRM associated with its prioritization operators, should be the ideal solutions for multi-criteria decision-making problems in various fields. Journal of the Operational Research Society (2012) 63, 322-338. doi:10.1057/jors.2011.33 Published online 18 May 2011
引用
收藏
页码:322 / 338
页数:17
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], MULT CRIT DEC BIBL
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1994, AHP SERIES
[3]   A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP [J].
Bana E Costa, Carlos A. ;
Vansnick, Jean-Claude .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2008, 187 (03) :1422-1428
[4]   Deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices [J].
Barzilai, J .
JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 1997, 48 (12) :1226-1232
[5]   ON A SHORT-COMING OF SAATY METHOD OF ANALYTIC HIERARCHIES [J].
BELTON, V ;
GEAR, T .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1983, 11 (03) :228-230
[6]   APPROACHES TO CONSISTENCY ADJUSTMENT [J].
BLANKMEYER, E .
JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 1987, 54 (03) :479-488
[7]  
BRYSON N, 1995, J OPER RES SOC, V46, P641, DOI 10.2307/2584536
[8]   A COMPARISON OF THE EIGENVALUE METHOD AND THE GEOMETRIC MEAN PROCEDURE FOR RATIO SCALING [J].
BUDESCU, DV ;
ZWICK, R ;
RAPOPORT, A .
APPLIED PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1986, 10 (01) :69-78
[9]   Linear programming models for estimating weights in the analytic hierarchy process [J].
Chandran, B ;
Golden, B ;
Wasil, E .
COMPUTERS & OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2005, 32 (09) :2235-2254
[10]   COMPARISON OF 2 METHODS FOR DETERMINING THE WEIGHTS OF BELONGING TO FUZZY-SETS [J].
CHU, ATW ;
KALABA, RE ;
SPINGARN, K .
JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 1979, 27 (04) :531-538