Establishing a Multiple Structures Analysis Model for AHP

2018

This paper examines the pattern of development of the AHP research. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was introduced by T.L. Saaty, is an effective tool for dealing with complex decision making, and may aid the decision maker to set priorities and make the best decision. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a theory of measurement through pairwise comparisons and relies on the judgments of experts to derive priority scales, these scales that measure intangibles in relative terms. The ratio scales are derived from the principal Eigen vectors and the consistency index is derived from the principal Eigen value.

Analytical Hierarchy Process is one of the most inclusive system which is considered to make decisions with multiple criteria because this method gives to formulate the problem as a hierarchical and believe a mixture of quantitative and qualitative criteria as well. This paper summarizes the process of conducting Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP).

Expert Systems With Applications, 2011

In this paper the authors review the developments of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) since its inception. The focus of this paper is a neutral review on the methodological developments rather than reporting its applications that have appeared since its introduction. In particular, we discuss problem modelling, pair-wise comparisons, judgement scales, derivation methods, consistency indices, incomplete matrix, synthesis of the weights, sensitivity analysis and group decisions. All have been important areas of research in AHP.► Methodological developments of the analytic hierarchy process are reviewed. ► We discuss problem modelling, pair-wise comparisons, judgement scales. ► We examine derivation methods, consistency indices, incomplete matrix. ► We explore synthesis of the weights, sensitivity analysis and group decisions.

Decisions involve many intangibles that need to be traded off. To do that, they have to be measured along side tangibles whose measurements must also be evaluated as to, how well, they serve the objectives of the decision maker. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a theory of measurement through pairwise comparisons and relies on the judgements of experts to derive priority scales. It is these scales that measure intangibles in relative terms. The comparisons are made using a scale of absolute judgements that represents, how much more, one element dominates another with respect to a given attribute. The judgements may be inconsistent, and how to measure inconsistency and improve the judgements, when possible to obtain better consistency is a concern of the AHP. The derived priority scales are synthesised by multiplying them by the priority of their parent nodes and adding for all such nodes. An illustration is included.

Expert Systems with Applications, 2011

In this paper the authors review the developments of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) since its inception. The focus of this paper is a neutral review on the methodological developments rather than reporting its applications that have appeared since its introduction. In ...

European Journal of operational research, 2006

This article presents a literature review of the applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). AHP is a multiple criteria decision-making tool that has been used in almost all the applications related with decision-making. Out of many different applications of AHP, this article covers a select few, which could be of wide interest to the researchers and practitioners. The article critically analyses some of the papers published in international journals of high repute, and gives a brief idea about many of the referred publications. Papers are categorized according to the identified themes, and on the basis of the areas of applications. The references have also been grouped region-wise and year-wise in order to track the growth of AHP applications. To help readers extract quick and meaningful information, the references are summarized in various tabular formats and charts.

European Journal of Operational Research, 1990

Mathematics

A well-regarded as well as powerful method named the ‘analytic hierarchy process’ (AHP) uses mathematics and psychology for making and analysing complex decisions. This article aims to present a brief review of the consistency measure of the judgments in AHP. Judgments should not be random or illogical. Several researchers have developed different consistency measures to identify the rationality of judgments. This article summarises the consistency measures which have been proposed so far in the literature. Moreover, this paper describes briefly the functional relationships established in the literature among the well-known consistency indices. At last, some thoughtful research directions that can be helpful in further research to develop and improve the performance of AHP are provided as well.

This paper serves as an introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process -A multicriteria decision making approach in which factors are arranged in a hierarchic structure. The principles and the philosophy of the theory are summarized giving general background information of the type of measurement utilized, its properties and applications.

2020

Everyone makes decisions almost daily about routine purchases. When different items (e.g bread, milk) provide the same quality and quantity then potentially, the purchase decision is based on monetary grounds. However, when the additional criteria like quantity, quality, etc, change, such a situation demands activation of a simplistic form of multi-criteria analysis which is performed by our brain. However, when the purchases are non-routine and have multi-criteria then those become complex which prompts us to consult our friends and sometimes the relevant specialist persons for good guidance. One such example may be a decision to buy a car which in addition to the capital cost, more parameters come into play like fuel economy, availability of spare parts, operation and maintenance cost, safety, and others. The above two situations generally don’t demand any kind of analytical or other processes to address its complexity, however, projects of commercial or communal interest do demand such where conflicts in terms of individual subjectivity surface. To address the subjectivities, Mathematicians and Statisticians have developed various tools and processes. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is a sub discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making (Multiple-criteria decision analysis, 2020). The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a general theory of measurement that has found its widest applications in multi-criteria decision making, planning, and resource allocation, and in conflict resolution (Saatay, 1987). The AHP method makes it possible to assign a value representing the preference degree for a given alternative to each additional alternative. Such values can be used to classify and select alternatives based on a hierarchical structure (Junyi Chai, August 2013). AHP is the most widely used method for evaluating software (Ashu Gupta, 2010). AHP has also been applied to supplier and vendor selection (Maggie C.Y. Tam, April 2001). Recent approaches have combined AHP with other methods (Ahn, March 2017). AHP helps capture both subjective and objective evaluation measures, providing a useful mechanism for checking their consistency relative to considered alternatives, thus reducing bias in decision making (Mann, 1995). The weighting values in the AHP, which reflect the status or role of various factors in the evaluation process, directly affect the decision-making results (S. Prechaverakul, 1995). Consultation is the first step toward designing, execution, and operation of a sustainable project. The same help in conflict resolution, conducting trade-offs, and bringing in objectivity. AHP helps to smoothen the whole process by taking away personal subjectivities. The process is observable and without manipulation but there is an intrinsic challenge. Which is that why a certain weightage is assigned to the component, and its factors and sub-factors? This in-built flaw has derived a considerable amount of objection to it (MCDA or AHP methods for different alternatives, 2020). Given its flaw, it is still a good process and widely used by many professionals across the globe. MCDA is a family of methods whereas AHP is one of the approaches to address the method (MCDA or AHP methods for different alternatives, 2020). In this approach, the following steps are required to successfully conclude the effort (Asim, 2020); 1. Clearly defining the objective 2. Defining criteria for success 3. Assigning weights to criteria and its factors and sub-factors 4. Listing all the potential project options 5. The rating according to a pre-defined scale in a group for more objectivity. I prefer the Likert Scale. 6. Calculate and rank