Analysis of Parts Weight of Railway Concrete Girder Bridges by Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process

2012 ◽  
Vol 204-208 ◽  
pp. 2105-2108
Author(s):  
Fan Yang ◽  
Mu Biao Su ◽  
Qing Ning Li ◽  
Xian Li Yan ◽  
Tao Feng
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Comparison Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Railway Bridges ◽  
Girder Bridges ◽  
Fuzzy Synthetical Evaluation ◽  
Girder Bridge ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Concrete Girder

In order to accurately determine the weight of railway bridges parts, for railway concrete girder bridge case, this thesis is based on analysing the construction features of the railway concrete girder bridges and destructive characteristic of seismic damage and proposes a detailed method, which adopts combination of the analytic hierarchy process and the fuzzy synthetical evaluation. The weight of railway concrete girder bridges can be confirmed, by utilizing its logical and pairwise comparison method, Studies show that this is an effective method to confirm the weight of railway concrete girder bridges. It is of great value to quickly evaluate earthquake loss of railway bridges in the earthquake stricken areas.

Ratio and Difference Estimation in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. A. Lootsma
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Cross Validation ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Comparison Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Common Basis ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Relative Preferences

Abstract Since decisions are invariably made within a given context, we model relative preferences as ratios of increments or decrements in an interval on the axis of desirability. Next, we sort the ratio magnitudes into a small number of categories, represented by numerical values on a geometric scale. We explain why the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), typically based on a pairwise-comparison method, is concerned with category judgement of ratio magnitudes, whereas the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) essentially uses the orders of magnitude of these ratios. This provides a common basis for the analysis of the methods in question and for a cross-validation of their results. The present paper summarizes the basic assumptions and the relationship between the two methods.

DETERMINING THE DESALINATION UNIT COMPOSITION FOR COSTAL AREAS AND SMALL ISLANDS USE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Imam Setiadi ◽  
Dinda Rita K. Hartaja
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Small Islands ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Comparison Research ◽  
Hierarchy Process ◽  
Selection Of

Selection of the appropriate composition desalination units can be done with a variety of method approaches, one of the method is the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In determining the desalination unit with AHP method to consider is setting a goal, an alternative criteria and pairwise comparison. Research for the determination of the exact composition of the desalination unit in order to achieve sustainable drinking water suppy in coastal areas and small islands has been conducted. The results of the study are as follows, the energy demand of 50.83%, operator costs of 26.64%, maintenance costs of 14.13% and chemical requirement 8.4%. For an alternative composition desalination unit of RO 10 m3 / day is the best alternative composition with value of 59.61%, the composition of the next alternative is RO 20 m3/ day of 30.40% and the last alternative of the desalination unit composition is RO 120 m3/ day of 09.99%.Key words : Desalination, Mukti Stage Flash Composition, AHP

On Moderate Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process Pairwise Comparison Model With Subcriteria

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 54
Author(s):  
G. Marimuthu ◽  
G. Ramesh
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Fuzzy Ahp ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Decision Models ◽  
Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Comparison Model ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Decisions usually involve the getting the best solution, selecting the suitable experiments, most appropriate judgments, taking the quality results etc., using some techniques.  Every decision making can be considered as the choice from the set of alternatives based on a set of criteria.  The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is a multi-criteria decision making and is dealing with decision making problems through pairwise comparisons mode [10].  The weight vectors from this comparison model are obtained by using extent analysis method.  This paper concern with an alternate method of finding the weight vectors from the original fuzzy AHP decision model (moderate fuzzy AHP model), that has the same rank as obtained in original fuzzy AHP and ideal fuzzy AHP decision models.

JUDGMENT NUMBER REDUCTION: AN ISSUE IN THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS

2010 ◽  
Vol 09 (01) ◽  
pp. 175-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
LONG-TING WU ◽  
XIA CUI ◽  
RU-WEI DAI
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Random Variable ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Priority Vector ◽  
Judgment Error ◽  
Scale Error ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) uses pairwise comparison to evaluate alternatives' advantages to a certain criterion. For decision-making problem with many different criteria and alternatives, pairwise comparison causes a prolonged decision-making period and rises fatigue in decision-makers' mentality. A question of practical value is if there exists a way to reduce judgment number and what influence the reduction will have on the overall evaluation of alternative ratings. To answer this question, we introduce scale error and judgment error into AHP judgment matrix. By expanding the scales defined in the AHP, scale error is eliminated. Taking judgment error as random variable, a new estimator to calculate priority vector is presented. In the end, an example is proved to show lowering judgment number will increase the probability of larger errors appearing in priority vector computation.

Comparison of methods of ranking scientists based on the Hirsch and PageRank indices: contradictory situations

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Hryhorii Hnatiienko ◽  
Oleksiy Oletsky
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
The Other ◽  
Publication Activity ◽  
Comparison Of Methods ◽  
Automated Systems ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
H Index ◽  
Scientometric Indicators ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Experiments aimed at comparing different methods of estimating and ranking scientists and researchers on the base of their publication activity are reported. Scientometric indicators based on h-index and PageRank are being compared. For such a comparison, a graph of citations represented by a matrix was applied. An example when different methods lead to opposite results was described. For example, authors having the best PageRank-based estimations may have the least h-indices. Such a situation is possible when a high-cited author managed to obtain a key result cited by all the other authors but this author has few papers. A comparison with methods of expert estimations was carried out, which appears to be very useful for building automated systems combining various methods of algorithmic estimating and ranking. The Analytic Hierarchy Process was applied. For building pairwise comparison matrices, transitive scales with a parameter representing how much times the next level of advantage is bigger than the previous one were harnessed.

The Problem of Adequacy of the Analytic Hierarchy Process

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 79-87
Author(s):  
V.M. Romanchuk
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Measurement Procedure ◽  
Ahp Method ◽  
Calculation Algorithm ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Rating Method ◽  
Simple Measurement ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a popular method for solving multi-criteria problems. However, the problem of the adequacy of the AHP method is not solved. Opponents of the Analytic hierarchy process believe that the AHP as a whole is erroneous and cannot be applied in practice. Proponents of the method believe that the disadvantages of the method are compensated by a simple measurement procedure. In this paper, a modification of the AHP method is proposed. A mathematical model of measurement is formulated, which contains a built-in mechanism for checking adequacy. moreover, the measurement method is preserved, and the calculation algorithm becomes even simpler. The fact is that the Analytic hierarchy process is based on the assumption that the scale of relations can be obtained by pairwise comparison using numerical judgments based on the absolute scale of numbers. Fechner’s psychophysical law is considered as a justification for the existence of the scale of relations. But there are not one, but two psychophysical laws. The existence of two psychophysical laws is a problem of psychophysics. This problem can be solved by the rating method. To overcome the disadvantages of the Analytic hierarchy process, it is also proposed to use the rating method. The use of the rating method makes it possible to use the fundamental scale of the AHP method. As an example, the problem is solved using the traditional AHP scale.

scholarly journals Sustainable Urban Transport Planning Considering Different Stakeholder Groups by an Interval-AHP Decision Support Model

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omid Ghorbanzadeh ◽  
Sarbast Moslem ◽  
Thomas Blaschke ◽  
Szabolcs Duleba
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Public Transportation ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Urban Transport ◽  
Preference Ranking ◽  
Decision Support Model ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
User Groups ◽  
Hierarchy Process

Sustainable urban transport requires smart and environmentally-friendly technical solutions. It also needs to meet the demands of different user groups, including current and potential future users, in order to avoid opposition of the citizens and to support sustainable development decisions. While these requirements are well-known, conducting full surveys of user needs and preferences are tedious and costly, and the interests of different user groups may be contradictory. We therefore developed a methodology based on the prevalent Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which is capable of dealing with the inconsistencies and uncertainties of users’ responses by applying an Interval Analytic Hierarchy Process (IAHP) through comparing the results of passengers to reference stakeholder groups. For a case study in Mersin, a coastal city in southern Turkey with 1.7 Million inhabitants, three groups were surveyed with questionnaires: 40 users of the public transport system, 40 non-users, and 17 experts. Based on interval pairwise comparison matrices, consisting of whole judgments of all groups, the IAHP methodology could attain a consensual preference ranking for a future public transportation system between the three groups. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the factor ranking was very stable.

scholarly journals A Method of Assigning Weights Using a Ranking and Nonhierarchy Comparison

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bangweon Song ◽  
Seokjoong Kang
Keyword(s):  
Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Pairwise Comparison ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Consistency Ratio ◽  
Whole Number ◽  
The Analytic Hierarchy Process ◽  
Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has advantages that the whole number of comparisons can be reduced via a hierarchy structure and the consistency of responses verified via a consistency ratio. However, at the same time, the AHP has disadvantages that values vary according to the form of hierarchy structure and it is difficult to maintain consistency itself among responses. If the number of comparisons can be reduced, a comparison within a single level is optimal, and if comparison can be made while the priority among entities is maintained, consistency may be automatically maintained. Thus, in this study, we propose a method of assigning weights, which applies hierarchy structure of AHP and pairwise comparison but complements the disadvantages of AHP. This method has advantages that the number of comparisons can be reduced and also consistency is automatically maintained via determination of priorities first on multiple entities and subsequent comparisons between entities with adjoined priorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document