IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v10y2022i19p3499-d924676.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deriving Fuzzy Weights from the Consistent Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process

Author

Listed:
  • Chin-Yi Chen

    (Department of Business Administration, Chung Yuan Christian University, No. 200 Chung Pei Road, Chung Li District, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan)

  • Jih-Jeng Huang

    (Department of Computer Science & Information Management, Soochow University, Taipei 100, Taiwan)

Abstract

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is one of the most popular multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methods, and so is its extension fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP). However, the FAHP, unlike the AHP, easily handles the trusted weights by the consistency index (CI) or consistency ratio (CR). We need to first derive the consistent fuzzy pairwise comparison matrix (FPCM) by the transitivity axiom and then drive fuzzy weights. We also need a flexible mechanism for users to control the spread of fuzzy weights under tolerable consistency. In this paper, we propose a novel model based on mathematical programming to derive rational fuzzy weights of the FAHP and provide a parameter for decision-makers to control the spread of fuzzy weights. Three examples are used to demonstrate the proposed method and compared with others to validate and justify the proposed method.

Suggested Citation

  • Chin-Yi Chen & Jih-Jeng Huang, 2022. "Deriving Fuzzy Weights from the Consistent Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:19:p:3499-:d:924676
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/19/3499/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/10/19/3499/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leung, L. C. & Cao, D., 2000. "On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 102-113, July.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    3. Wang, Ying-Ming & Luo, Ying & Hua, Zhongsheng, 2008. "On the extent analysis method for fuzzy AHP and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 735-747, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Meimei Xia & Jian Chen, 2015. "Studies on Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations and Their Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 115-144, January.
    6. Wang, Zhou-Jing, 2015. "A note on “A goal programming model for incomplete interval multiplicative preference relations and its application in group decision-making”," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(3), pages 867-871.
    7. Sricharan Chirra & Dinesh Kumar, 2018. "Analysis of supply chain issues under sales promotional schemes using FAHP," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 31(2), pages 224-248.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    2. Meng, Fanyong & Tan, Chunqiao & Chen, Xiaohong, 2017. "Multiplicative consistency analysis for interval fuzzy preference relations: A comparative study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 17-38.
    3. Jinpei Liu & Jingmiao Song & Qin Xu & Zhifu Tao & Huayou Chen, 2019. "Group decision making based on DEA cross-efficiency with intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 345-370, September.
    4. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    5. Zhü, Kèyù, 2014. "Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 209-217.
    6. Paweł Karczmarek & Witold Pedrycz & Adam Kiersztyn, 2021. "Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in a Graphical Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 463-481, April.
    7. Wu-E Yang & Chao-Qun Ma & Zhi-Qiu Han & Wen-Jun Chen, 2016. "Checking and adjusting order-consistency of linguistic pairwise comparison matrices for getting transitive preference relations," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 38(3), pages 769-787, July.
    8. Gerzson Kéri, 2011. "On qualitatively consistent, transitive and contradictory judgment matrices emerging from multiattribute decision procedures," 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. 19(2), pages 215-224, June.
    9. Jih-Jeng Huang & Chin-Yi Chen, 2024. "A Generalized Method for Deriving Steady-State Behavior of Consistent Fuzzy Priority for Interdependent Criteria," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Li, Kevin W. & Wang, Zhou-Jing & Tong, Xiayu, 2016. "Acceptability analysis and priority weight elicitation for interval multiplicative comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 628-638.
    11. Nitidetch Koohathongsumrit & Pongchanun Luangpaiboon, 2022. "An integrated FAHP–ZODP approach for strategic marketing information system project selection," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1792-1809, September.
    12. Hsin-Chieh Wu & Toly Chen & Chin-Hau Huang, 2020. "A Piecewise Linear FGM Approach for Efficient and Accurate FAHP Analysis: Smart Backpack Design as an Example," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-18, August.
    13. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    14. Mohamed Hanine & Omar Boutkhoum & Abderrafie El Maknissi & Abdessadek Tikniouine & Tarik Agouti, 2016. "Decision making under uncertainty using PEES–fuzzy AHP–fuzzy TOPSIS methodology for landfill location selection," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 351-367, December.
    15. Wu, Xin & Nie, Lei & Xu, Meng, 2017. "Robust fuzzy quality function deployment based on the mean-end-chain concept: Service station evaluation problem for rail catering services," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 974-995.
    16. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    17. Yibin Zhang & Kevin W. Li & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Prioritization and Aggregation of Intuitionistic Preference Relations: A Multiplicative-Transitivity-Based Transformation from Intuitionistic Judgment Data to Priority Weights," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 409-436, March.
    18. Calabrese, Armando & Costa, Roberta & Levialdi, Nathan & Menichini, Tamara, 2019. "Integrating sustainability into strategic decision-making: A fuzzy AHP method for the selection of relevant sustainability issues," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 155-168.
    19. József Temesi, 2011. "Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker," 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. 19(2), pages 239-249, June.
    20. Faramondi, Luca & Oliva, Gabriele & Setola, Roberto & Bozóki, Sándor, 2023. "Robustness to rank reversal in pairwise comparison matrices based on uncertainty bounds," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(2), pages 676-688.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:10:y:2022:i:19:p:3499-:d:924676. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.