Decision making with uncertain judgments: A stochastic formulation of the analytic hierarchy process

被引:60
作者
Hahn, ED [1 ]
机构
[1] Salisbury Univ, Franklin P Perdue Sch Business, Dept Informat & Decis Sci, Salisbury, MD 21801 USA
关键词
analytic hierarchy process; Bayesian inference; multicriteria decision making (MCDM); logit modeling; Markov chains; and simulation;
D O I
10.1111/j.1540-5414.2003.02274.x
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
In the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), priorities are derived via a deterministic method, the eigenvalue decomposition. However, judgments may be subject to error. A stochastic characterization of the pairwise comparison judgment task is provided and statistical models are introduced for deriving the underlying priorities. Specifically, a weighted hierarchical multinomial logit model is used to obtain the priorities. Inference is then conducted from the Bayesian viewpoint using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. The stochastic methods are found to give results that are congruent with those of the eigenvector method in matrices of different sizes and different levels of inconsistency. Moreover, inferential statements can be made about the priorities when the stochastic approach is adopted, and these statements may be of considerable value to a decision maker. The methods described are fully compatible with judgments from the standard version of AHP and can be used to construct a stochastic formulation of it.
引用
收藏
页码:443 / 466
页数:24
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
Agresti A., 1990, Analysis of categorical data
[2]   APPROXIMATE ARTICULATION OF PREFERENCE AND PRIORITY DERIVATION [J].
ARBEL, A .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1989, 43 (03) :317-326
[3]   COSTS AND BENEFITS OF JUDGMENT ERRORS - IMPLICATIONS FOR DEBIASING [J].
ARKES, HR .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1991, 110 (03) :486-498
[4]   Probabilistic judgments specified partially in the Analytic Hierarchy Process [J].
Basak, I .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1998, 108 (01) :153-164
[6]   A multiple-item model of paired comparisons: Separating chance from latent preference [J].
Bemmaor, AC ;
Wagner, U .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2000, 37 (04) :514-524
[7]  
BERGER J. O., 2013, Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis, DOI [10.1007/978-1-4757-4286-2, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4757-4286-2]
[8]   EXPLAINING THE GIBBS SAMPLER [J].
CASELLA, G ;
GEORGE, EI .
AMERICAN STATISTICIAN, 1992, 46 (03) :167-174
[9]   UNDERSTANDING THE METROPOLIS-HASTINGS ALGORITHM [J].
CHIB, S ;
GREENBERG, E .
AMERICAN STATISTICIAN, 1995, 49 (04) :327-335
[10]   A NOTE ON THE ANALYSIS OF SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENT MATRICES [J].
CRAWFORD, G ;
WILLIAMS, C .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1985, 29 (04) :387-405