IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/apmaco/v279y2016icp103-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconstruction methods for AHP pairwise matrices: How reliable are they?

Author

Listed:
  • Karanik, Marcelo
  • Wanderer, Leonardo
  • Gomez-Ruiz, Jose Antonio
  • Pelaez, Jose Ignacio

Abstract

Habitually, decision-makers are exposed to situations that require a lot of knowledge and expertise. Therefore, they need tools to help them choose the best possible alternatives. Analytic hierarchical process (AHP) is one of those tools and it is widely used in many fields. While the use of AHP is very simple, there is a situation that becomes complex: the consistency of the pairwise matrices. In order to obtain the consistent pairwise matrix from the inconsistent one, reconstruction methods can be used, but they cannot guarantee getting the right matrix according to the judgments of the decision maker. This situation does not allow proper evaluation of methods reliability, i.e. it is not possible to obtain a reliable ranking of alternatives based on an inconsistent matrix. In this work, a new way to evaluate the reliability of matrix reconstruction methods is proposed. This technique uses a novel measure for alternatives ranking comparison (based on element positions and distances), which is introduced in order to compare several matrix reconstruction methods. Finally, in order to demonstrate the extensibility of this new reliability measure, two reconstruction methods based on bio-inspired models (a Genetic Algorithm and the Firefly Algorithm) are presented and evaluated by using the aforementioned reliability measure.

Suggested Citation

  • Karanik, Marcelo & Wanderer, Leonardo & Gomez-Ruiz, Jose Antonio & Pelaez, Jose Ignacio, 2016. "Reconstruction methods for AHP pairwise matrices: How reliable are they?," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 279(C), pages 103-124.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:279:y:2016:i:c:p:103-124
    DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009630031630008X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.amc.2016.01.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 2008. "A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(3), pages 1422-1428, June.
    2. Kwak, N. K. & Lee, Chang W., 2002. "Business process reengineering for health-care system using multicriteria mathematical programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 447-458, July.
    3. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    4. Mandic, Ksenija & Delibasic, Boris & Knezevic, Snezana & Benkovic, Sladjana, 2014. "Analysis of the financial parameters of Serbian banks through the application of the fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-37.
    5. Ghodsypour, S. H. & O'Brien, C., 1998. "A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 199-212, September.
    6. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    7. Lolli, F. & Ishizaka, A. & Gamberini, R., 2014. "New AHP-based approaches for multi-criteria inventory classification," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 62-74.
    8. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    9. Korpela, Jukka & Kylaheiko, Kalevi & Lehmusvaara, Antti & Tuominen, Markku, 2002. "An analytic approach to production capacity allocation and supply chain design," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 187-195, July.
    10. Grover S. Kearns, 2004. "A Multi-Objective, Multi-Criteria Approach for Evaluating IT Investments: Results from Two Case Studies," Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), IGI Global, vol. 17(1), pages 37-62, January.
    11. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ahmad, Salman & Nadeem, Abid & Akhanova, Gulzhanat & Houghton, Tom & Muhammad-Sukki, Firdaus, 2017. "Multi-criteria evaluation of renewable and nuclear resources for electricity generation in Kazakhstan," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1880-1891.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ho, William, 2008. "Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications - A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 211-228, April.
    2. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    3. Kang Xu & Jiuping Xu, 2020. "A direct consistency test and improvement method for the analytic hierarchy process," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 359-388, September.
    4. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    5. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    6. József Temesi, 2019. "An interactive approach to determine the elements of a pairwise comparison matrix," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 27(2), pages 533-549, June.
    7. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.
    8. AlSabbagh, Maha & Siu, Yim Ling & Guehnemann, Astrid & Barrett, John, 2017. "Integrated approach to the assessment of CO2e-mitigation measures for the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 203-215.
    9. Kuei-Hu Chang & Yung-Chia Chang & Kai Chain & Hsiang-Yu Chung, 2016. "Integrating Soft Set Theory and Fuzzy Linguistic Model to Evaluate the Performance of Training Simulation Systems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-29, September.
    10. Paul Thaddeus Kazibudzki, 2016. "An examination of performance relations among selected consistency measures for simulated pairwise judgments," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 525-544, September.
    11. May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Tjader, Youxu Cai & Vargas, Luis G., 2013. "A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 180-188.
    12. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2016. "Combining analytical hierarchy process and Choquet integral within non-additive robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 2-18.
    13. Stein, William E. & Mizzi, Philip J., 2007. "The harmonic consistency index for the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 488-497, February.
    14. Madhusudhan Adhikari & Laxman Prasad Ghimire & Yeonbae Kim & Prakash Aryal & Sundar Bahadur Khadka, 2020. "Identification and Analysis of Barriers against Electric Vehicle Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Alessio Ishizaka & Sajid Siraj, 2020. "Interactive consistency correction in the analytic hierarchy process to preserve ranks," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 443-464, December.
    16. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    17. Daji Ergu & Gang Kou & János Fülöp & Yong Shi, 2014. "Further Discussions on Induced Bias Matrix Model for the Pair-Wise Comparison Matrix," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 980-993, June.
    18. Mehmet Yüksel, 2019. "A Model Proposal for the Evaluation of Chemistry Education in the Context of Learning Environment," Asian Journal of Education and Training, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 488-494.
    19. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    20. M. Gabriela Sava & Luis G. Vargas & Jerrold H. May & James G. Dolan, 2022. "Multi-dimensional stability analysis for Analytic Network Process models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1401-1424, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:279:y:2016:i:c:p:103-124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-mathematics-and-computation .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.