Analytic hierarchy prioritization process in the AHP application development: A prioritization operator selection approach

被引:33
作者
Yuen, Kevin Kam Fung [1 ]
机构
[1] Hong Kong Polytech Univ, Dept Ind & Syst Engn, Kowloon, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
关键词
AHP; Prioritization methods; Prioritization operators; Prioritization method measurement; Multicriteria decision making; GOAL PROGRAMMING METHOD; WEIGHTS; EIGENVALUE;
D O I
10.1016/j.asoc.2009.08.041
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
In the analytic hierarchy process, prioritization of the reciprocal matrix is a core issue to influence the final decision choice. Various prioritization methods have been proposed, but none of prioritization methods performs better than others in every inconsistent case. To address the prioritation operator selection problem, this paper proposes the analytic hierarchy prioritization process, which is an objective hierarchy model ( without using subjective pairwise comparisons) to approximate the real priority vectors with selection of the most appropriate prioritization operator among the various prioritization candidates, for a reciprocal matrix, and on the basis of a list of measurement criteria. Nine important prioritization operators and seven measurement criteria are illustrated in AHPP. Two previous applications are revised and illustrate the validity and usability of the proposed model. The results show that the most appropriate prioritization operator is dependent of the content of the reciprocal matrix and AHPP is an appropriate method to address the prioritization problem to make better decisions. (C) 2009 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:975 / 989
页数:15
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   The geometric consistency index:: Approximated thresholds [J].
Aguarón, J ;
Moreno-Jiménez, JM .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2003, 147 (01) :137-145
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1999, SYSTEMS MAN CYBERNET
[3]   Deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices [J].
Barzilai, J .
JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY, 1997, 48 (12) :1226-1232
[4]  
BELTON V, 1983, OMEGA, V3, P228
[5]   APPROACHES TO CONSISTENCY ADJUSTMENT [J].
BLANKMEYER, E .
JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 1987, 54 (03) :479-488
[6]  
BRYSON N, 1995, J OPER RES SOC, V46, P641, DOI 10.2307/2584536
[7]   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
[8]   A common framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices [J].
Choo, EU ;
Wedley, WC .
COMPUTERS & OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2004, 31 (06) :893-908
[9]   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
[10]   A NOTE ON THE ANALYSIS OF SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENT MATRICES [J].
CRAWFORD, G ;
WILLIAMS, C .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1985, 29 (04) :387-405