scholarly journals THE MAGIC OF THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS (AHP)

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Orrin Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Scientific Justification ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Careful Investigation

Dr. Thomas Saaty developed the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with the underlying goal of making it simple and accessible to the lay user. In Saaty’s own words, the AHP is based on how “ordinary people process information” and “express the strength of their judgments” (Saaty, 1994, p. 37). Because he was successful in developing the AHP in accordance with these goals, when decision makers use the AHP their experience can feel magical as they find pairwise comparisons natural and can relate to the final priorities. Careful investigation of the axioms, theorems, and proofs shows that the AHP is more than just magic and provides scientific justification of the highest order. Five important components of the AHP and some background into the history of its development are summarized and highlighted from Saaty’s article, “How to Make a Decision: the Analytic Hierarchy Process” (Saaty, 1994). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i3.519

Some Conflicting Results in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (02) ◽  
pp. 465-486 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ardalan Bafahm ◽  
Minghe Sun
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Unexpected Result ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Preference Relations ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been believed to be one of the most pragmatic and widely accepted methods for multi-criteria decision making. However, there have been various criticisms of this method within the last four decades. In this study, the results of AHP contradicting common expectations are examined for both the distributive and ideal modes. Specifically, conflicting priorities, conflicting decisions, and conflicting preference relations are investigated. A decision-making scenario is used throughout the paper and an illustrative example constructed from the decision-making scenario is provided to demonstrate each of the conflicting results recommended by AHP. With a parametric formulation of each unexpected result, the possibility of unexpected results of AHP is generalized irrespective of applying the distributive or ideal mode. The logic and causes of these contradictions are also analyzed. This study shows that AHP is not always reliable, and could lead the decision makers towards incorrect decisions.

scholarly journals On the features of the implementation of the interval method for analytic hierarchy process in the problem of assessing the effectiveness of the employment service

2020 ◽  
pp. 41-48
Author(s):  
N. F. Bogachenko ◽  
D. N. Lavrov
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Interval Arithmetic ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Efficiency Function ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Employment Service ◽  
Interval Method ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Weight Coefficients

To determine the weight coefficients of the efficiency function of the employment service, the analytic hierarchy process and interval arithmetic were used. This made it possible to take into account the opinions of various experts without losing the consistency of the matrices of pairwise comparisons.

HANDLING UNCERTAINTY IN THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS: A STOCHASTIC APPROACH

2007 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 177-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
HAMIDREZA ESKANDARI ◽  
LUIS RABELO
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Rank Order ◽  
Stochastic Approach ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Propagation Of Uncertainty ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Alternatives ◽  
School Selection ◽  
Hierarchy Process

This paper describes a methodology for handling the propagation of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). In real applications, the pairwise comparisons are usually subject to judgmental errors and are inconsistent and conflicting with each other. Therefore, the weight point estimates provided by the eigenvector method are necessarily approximate. This uncertainty associated with subjective judgmental errors may affect the rank order of decision alternatives. A new stochastic approach is presented to capture the uncertain behavior of the global AHP weights. This approach could help decision makers gain insight into how the imprecision in judgment ratios may affect their choice toward the best solution and how the best alternative(s) may be identified with certain confidence. The proposed approach is applied to the example problem introduced by Saaty for the best high school selection to illustrate the concepts introduced in this paper and to prove its usefulness and practicality.

Group assessment of key indicators of sustainable waste management in developing countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (9) ◽  
pp. 913-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Tot ◽  
Goran Vujić ◽  
Zorica Srđević ◽  
Dejan Ubavin ◽  
Mário Augusto Tavares Russo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Borda Count ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Decision makers in developing countries are struggling to solve the present problems of solid waste management. Prioritisation and ranking of the most important indicators that influence the waste management system is very useful for any decision maker for the future planning and implementation of a sustainable waste management system. The aim of this study is to evaluate key indicators and their related sub-indicators in a group decision-making environment. In order to gain insight into the subject it was necessary to obtain the qualified opinions of decision makers from different countries who understand the situation in the sector of waste management in developing countries. An assessment is performed by 43 decision makers from both developed and developing countries, and the applied methodology is based on a combined use of the analytic hierarchy process, from the multi-criteria decision-making set of tools, and the preferential voting method known as Borda Count, which belongs to social choice theory. Pairwise comparison of indicators is performed with the analytic hierarchy process, and the ranking of indicators once obtained is assessed with Borda Count. Detailed analysis of the final results showed that the Institutional–Administrative indicator was the most important one, with the maximum weight as derived by both groups of decision makers. The results also showed that the combined use of the analytic hierarchy process and Borda Count contributes to the credibility and objectivity of the decision-making process, allowing its use in more complex waste management group decision-making problems to be recommended.

ELICITING RATIO PREFERENCES FOR THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS WITH VISUAL INTERFACES: A NEW MODE OF PREFERENCE MEASUREMENT

2006 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 245-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
SAJJAD ZAHIR
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Preference Measurement ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
New Class ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Simultaneous Comparisons ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Visual Interfaces

Although verbal and numerical scales are commonly used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process for pairwise comparisons, new experiments with computer-based visual tools confirm that ratio preferences can be effectively and efficiently elicited using adjustable visual tools and simultaneous comparisons, as well. Such an improved approach shows promise in the design of a new class of multi-criteria decision support system both for individual and group decisions.

scholarly journals Applying AHP in Conflict Resolution

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-147
Author(s):  
Luis G Vargas ◽  
H. J. Zoffer
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Graduate School ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
University Of Pittsburgh ◽  
Implementation Guidelines ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
The University ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The current failure to resolve conflicts worldwide highlights the need for a different approach to conflict resolution. A new International Center for Conflict Resolution (IC4CR), to be housed in the Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, was funded by the University of Pittsburgh Chancellor Patrick Gallagher in response to a proposal by professors Luis Vargas and Jerry Zoffer.  The mission of IC4CR is to provide decision makers with an in-depth understanding of the negotiating positions of all parties and recommend implementation guidelines, based on preferences and priorities, to facilitate resolution of otherwise intractable conflicts. We propose to implement this mission by conducting studies of diplomatic and corporate conflicts using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP).

scholarly journals Prioritizing the capabilities of unmanned underwater vehicles necessary for ISR based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Gwuihyeon Park ◽  
Taehyeon Lee ◽  
Chunghwan Lee ◽  
Jinho Lee
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Underwater Vehicles ◽  
Pairwise Comparisons ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Unmanned Underwater Vehicles ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
The One ◽  
Mine Countermeasures ◽  
The Military ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The need for unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) has received significant attention given the current security situation in the Korean Peninsula. UUVs are used in the military to perform five key missions: intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), mine countermeasures, anti-submarine warfare, inspection/identification, and oceanography. In this study, we analyze the standards of evaluation of the characteristics and capabilities of UUVs that are necessary for ISR missions, which are most important from among the above mentioned ones. First, we establish 5 main criteria and 15 sub-criteria by consulting a group of experts. Next, we use the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) for these criteria. It computes the relative weights of the criteria based on pairwise comparisons, in order to evaluate the relative importance and priorities of the criteria we established, by selecting another group of 51 experts for the evaluation of the pairwise comparisons among the criteria. Consequentially, the importance associated with performance and ability of the ISR tends to be relatively high while the one associated with cost and economy for operating the UUVs appears to be low. These results may be useful in analyzing required capabilities in a more objective and concrete manner while procuring UUVs in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document