IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v12y2024i6p828-d1355460.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consistency Improvement in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

Author

Listed:
  • Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon

    (Department of Production, UNESP–Sao Paulo State University, Guaratingueta 12516-410, SP, Brazil)

  • Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro Gomes

    (Pro-Rectory of Research, Federal University of ABC, Santo André 09210-580, SP, Brazil)

Abstract

Consistency checking is one of the reasons for the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) leadership in publications on multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM). Consistency is a measure of the quality of data input in the AHP. The theory of AHP provides indicators for the consistency of data. When an indicator is out of the desired interval, the data must be reviewed. This article presents a method for improving the consistency of reviewing the data input in an AHP application. First, a conventional literature review is presented on the theme. Then, an innovative tool of artificial intelligence is shown to confirm the main result of the conventional review: this topic is still attracting interest from AHP and MCDM researchers. Finally, a simple technique for consistency improvement is presented and illustrated with a practical case of MCDM: supplier selection by a company.

Suggested Citation

  • Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Luiz Flavio Autran Monteiro Gomes, 2024. "Consistency Improvement in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:12:y:2024:i:6:p:828-:d:1355460
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/6/828/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/12/6/828/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonella Petrillo & Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Claudemir Leif Tramarico, 2023. "State-of-the-Art Review on the Analytic Hierarchy Process with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Philippe Mongeon & Adèle Paul-Hus, 2016. "The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 213-228, January.
    3. Klaus D. Goepel, 2019. "Comparison of Judgment Scales of the Analytical Hierarchy Process — A New Approach," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 445-463, March.
    4. Sandra Alvarez Gallo & Julien Maheut, 2023. "Multi-Criteria Analysis for the Evaluation of Urban Freight Logistics Solutions: A Systematic Literature Review," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Jyrki Wallenius & James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Stanley Zionts & Kalyanmoy Deb, 2008. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1336-1349, July.
    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. David Ruiz Bargueño & Valerio Antonio Pamplona Salomon & Fernando Augusto Silva Marins & Pedro Palominos & Luis Armando Marrone, 2021. "State of the Art Review on the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Urban Mobility," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(24), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Shuang Yao & Donghua Yu & Yan Song & Hao Yao & Yuzhen Hu & Benhai Guo, 2018. "Dry Bulk Carrier Investment Selection through a Dual Group Decision Fusing Mechanism in the Green Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Maribel Vega-Arce & Gonzalo Salas & Gastón Núñez-Ulloa & Cristián Pinto-Cortez & Ivelisse Torres Fernandez & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2019. "Research performance and trends in child sexual abuse research: a Science Citation Index Expanded-based analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1505-1525, December.
    4. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    5. David E. Allen & Michael McAleer & Abhay K. Singh, 2016. "A Multi-Criteria Portfolio Analysis of Hedge Fund Strategies," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2017-03, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
    6. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3543-3575, June.
    7. Mike Thelwall, 2020. "Mid-career field switches reduce gender disparities in academic publishing," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1365-1383, June.
    8. Nasrabadi, Mohamadreza Azar & Beauregard, Yvan & Ekhlassi, Amir, 2024. "The implication of user-generated content in new product development process: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    9. Ünsal Özdilek, 2020. "Land and building separation based on Shapley values," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    11. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    12. Théodore Nikiema & Eugène C. Ezin & Sylvain Kpenavoun Chogou, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis of the State of Research on Agroecology Adoption and Methods Used for Its Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Maurer, Moritz, 2025. "Wild Experiments? Restricting Narratives in Research on Alternative Food and Agriculture Networks," OSF Preprints u2tyv, Center for Open Science.
    14. Guo, Mengzhuo & Zhang, Qingpeng & Liao, Xiuwu & Chen, Frank Youhua & Zeng, Daniel Dajun, 2021. "A hybrid machine learning framework for analyzing human decision-making through learning preferences," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    15. Michele Griessmair & Johannes Gettinger, 2020. "Take the Right Turn: The Role of Social Signals and Action–Reaction Sequences in Enacting Turning Points in Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 425-459, June.
    16. Manuel Sánchez-Pérez & Nuria Rueda-López & María Belén Marín-Carrillo & Eduardo Terán-Yépez, 2021. "Theoretical dilemmas, conceptual review and perspectives disclosure of the sharing economy: a qualitative analysis," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 1849-1883, October.
    17. Stephen, Dimity & Stahlschmidt, Stephan, 2021. "Performance and structures of the German science system 2021," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 5-2021, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    18. Simon Zaby, 2019. "Science Mapping of the Global Knowledge Base on Microfinance: Influential Authors and Documents, 1989–2019," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-21, July.
    19. Ana Batlles-delaFuente & Luis Jesús Belmonte-Ureña & José Antonio Plaza-Úbeda & Emilio Abad-Segura, 2021. "Sustainable Business Model in the Product-Service System: Analysis of Global Research and Associated EU Legislation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-33, September.
    20. Katarzyna Piwowar‐Sulej, 2021. "Core functions of Sustainable Human Resource Management. A hybrid literature review with the use of H‐Classics methodology," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 671-693, July.

    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:12:y:2024:i:6:p:828-:d:1355460. 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.