IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v274y2019i1d10.1007_s10479-018-2888-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deriving priorities from inconsistent PCM using network algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Marcin Anholcer

    (Poznań University of Economics and Business)

  • János Fülöp

    (Hungarian Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

In several multiobjective decision problems Pairwise Comparison Matrices (PCM) are applied to evaluate the decision variants. The problem that arises very often is the inconsistency of a given PCM. In such a situation it is important to approximate the PCM with a consistent one. One of the approaches is to minimize the distance between the matrices, most often the Euclidean distance. In the paper we consider the problem of minimizing the maximum distance. After applying the logarithmic transformation we are able to formulate the obtained subproblem as a Shortest Path Problem and solve it more efficiently. We analyze the structure of the set of optimal solutions and prove some of its properties. This allows us to provide an iterative algorithm that results in a unique, Pareto-efficient solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcin Anholcer & János Fülöp, 2019. "Deriving priorities from inconsistent PCM using network algorithms," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 57-74, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:274:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-018-2888-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-018-2888-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-018-2888-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-018-2888-x?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. Siraj, Sajid & Mikhailov, Ludmil & Keane, John A., 2015. "Contribution of individual judgments toward inconsistency in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 557-567.
    2. Matteo Brunelli & Michele Fedrizzi, 2015. "Axiomatic properties of inconsistency indices for pairwise comparisons," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(1), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Lin, Chang-Chun, 2007. "A revised framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(2), pages 1145-1150, January.
    4. Jalao, Eugene Rex & Wu, Teresa & Shunk, Dan, 2014. "An intelligent decomposition of pairwise comparison matrices for large-scale decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 270-280.
    5. Tomashevskii, I.L., 2015. "Eigenvector ranking method as a measuring tool: Formulas for errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 774-780.
    6. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    7. Bozóki, Sándor & Csató, László & Temesi, József, 2016. "An application of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices for ranking top tennis players," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(1), pages 211-218.
    8. R. Blanquero & E. Carrizosa & E. Conde, 2006. "Inferring Efficient Weights from Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 64(2), pages 271-284, October.
    9. Brunelli, Matteo & Fedrizzi, Michele, 2015. "Boundary properties of the inconsistency of pairwise comparisons in group decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 765-773.
    10. Hovanov, Nikolai V. & Kolari, James W. & Sokolov, Mikhail V., 2008. "Deriving weights from general pairwise comparison matrices," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 205-220, March.
    11. Kadziński, Miłosz & Ciomek, Krzysztof & Słowiński, Roman, 2015. "Modeling assignment-based pairwise comparisons within integrated framework for value-driven multiple criteria sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 830-841.
    12. Dede, Georgia & Kamalakis, Thomas & Sphicopoulos, Thomas, 2016. "Theoretical estimation of the probability of weight rank reversal in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 587-600.
    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. Fernandes, Rosário & Furtado, Susana, 2022. "Efficiency of the principal eigenvector of some triple perturbed consistent matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 1007-1015.

    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. Lundy, Michele & Siraj, Sajid & Greco, Salvatore, 2017. "The mathematical equivalence of the “spanning tree” and row geometric mean preference vectors and its implications for preference analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 197-208.
    2. 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.
    3. Chao, Xiangrui & Kou, Gang & Li, Tie & Peng, Yi, 2018. "Jie Ke versus AlphaGo: A ranking approach using decision making method for large-scale data with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 239-247.
    4. 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.
    5. Szádoczki, Zsombor & Bozóki, Sándor & Tekile, Hailemariam Abebe, 2022. "Filling in pattern designs for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices: (Quasi-)regular graphs with minimal diameter," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Majumdar, Abhijit & Tiwari, Manoj Kumar & Agarwal, Aastha & Prajapat, Kanika, 2021. "A new case of rank reversal in analytic hierarchy process due to aggregation of cost and benefit criteria," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 8(C).
    8. Fernandes, Rosário & Furtado, Susana, 2022. "Efficiency of the principal eigenvector of some triple perturbed consistent matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 1007-1015.
    9. Csató, László & Petróczy, Dóra Gréta, 2021. "On the monotonicity of the eigenvector method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(1), pages 230-237.
    10. Csató, László, 2019. "A characterization of the Logarithmic Least Squares Method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 212-216.
    11. Liu, Fang & Zou, Shu-Cai & Li, Qing, 2020. "Deriving priorities from pairwise comparison matrices with a novel consistency index," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 374(C).
    12. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    13. D'ora Gr'eta Petr'oczy & L'aszl'o Csat'o, 2019. "Revenue allocation in Formula One: a pairwise comparison approach," Papers 1909.12931, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2020.
    14. 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.
    15. María Romero & María Luisa Cuadrado & Luis Romero & Carlos Romero, 2020. "Optimum acceptability of telecommunications networks: a multi-criteria approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1899-1911, September.
    16. Matteo Brunelli & Michele Fedrizzi, 2019. "A general formulation for some inconsistency indices of pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 155-169, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Jiří Mazurek & Konrad Kulakowski, 2020. "Information gap in value propositions of business models of language schools," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 77-89.
    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. Michele Fedrizzi & Nino Civolani & Andrew Critch, 2020. "Inconsistency evaluation in pairwise comparison using norm-based distances," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 657-672, December.

    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:spr:annopr:v:274:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-018-2888-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.