IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v316y2022i1d10.1007_s10479-020-03572-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aggregation of the nearest consistency matrices with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM

Author

Listed:
  • Changsheng Lin

    (Yangtze Normal University)

  • Gang Kou

    (Southwestern University of Finance and Economics)

  • Yi Peng

    (University of Electronic Science and Technology of China)

  • Fawaz E. Alsaadi

    (King Abdulaziz University)

Abstract

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is widely used in group decision making (GDM). There are two traditional aggregation methods for the collective preference in AHP-GDM: aggregation of the individual judgments (AIJ) and aggregation of the individual priorities (AIP). However, AHP-GDM is sometimes less reliable only under the condition of AIJ and AIP because of the consensus and consistency of the individual pair-wise comparison matrices (PCMs) and prioritization methods. In this paper, we propose aggregation of the nearest consistent matrices (ANCM) with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM, simultaneously considering the consensus and consistency of the individual PCMs. ANCM is independent of prioritization methods while complying with the Pareto principal of social choice theory. Moreover, ANCM is easy to program and implement in resolving highly complex group decision making problems. Finally, two numerical examples illustrate the applications and advantages of the proposed ANCM.

Suggested Citation

  • Changsheng Lin & Gang Kou & Yi Peng & Fawaz E. Alsaadi, 2022. "Aggregation of the nearest consistency matrices with the acceptable consensus in AHP-GDM," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 179-195, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:316:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03572-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-020-03572-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-020-03572-1
    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/s10479-020-03572-1?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. Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2007. "AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach Based on Mixtures for Group Pattern Identification," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 485-506, November.
    2. Zahir, Sajjad, 1999. "Geometry of decision making and the vector space formulation of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 373-396, January.
    3. Kou, Gang & Lin, Changsheng, 2014. "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 225-232.
    4. María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-jiménez, 2007. "Aggregation of Individual Preference Structures in Ahp-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 287-301, July.
    5. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    6. Alfredo Altuzarra & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2010. "Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1755-1773, December.
    7. Altuzarra, Alfredo & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria & Salvador, Manuel, 2007. "A Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 367-382, October.
    8. Gang Kou & Yanqun Lu & Yi Peng & Yong Shi, 2012. "Evaluation Of Classification Algorithms Using Mcdm And Rank Correlation," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 197-225.
    9. Golany, B. & Kress, M., 1993. "A multicriteria evaluation of methods for obtaining weights from ratio-scale matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 210-220, September.
    10. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    11. Zhang, Huanhuan & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi, 2019. "Soft consensus cost models for group decision making and economic interpretations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 964-980.
    12. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    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. Meng, Fan-Yong & Zhao, Deng-Yu & Gong, Zai-Wu & Chu, Jun-Fei & Pedrycz, Witold & Yuan, Zhe, 2024. "Consensus adjustment for multi-attribute group decision making based on cross-allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(1), pages 200-216.

    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. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2016. "The precise consistency consensus matrix in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 245-259, October.
    2. Manuel Salvador & Alfredo Altuzarra & Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2015. "A Bayesian Approach to Maximising Inner Compatibility in AHP-Systemic Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 655-673, July.
    3. José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador & Pilar Gargallo & Alfredo Altuzarra, 2016. "Systemic decision making in AHP: a Bayesian approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 261-284, October.
    4. 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).
    5. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Alberto Turón, 2019. "AHP-Group Decision Making Based on Consistency," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Alfredo Altuzarra & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2010. "Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1755-1773, December.
    7. Kou, Gang & Lin, Changsheng, 2014. "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 225-232.
    8. Amenta, Pietro & Lucadamo, Antonio & Marcarelli, Gabriella, 2021. "On the choice of weights for aggregating judgments in non-negotiable AHP group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 294-301.
    9. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    10. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2023. "Reducing incompatibility in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(1), pages 1-26, July.
    11. Jerónimo Aznar & Francisco Guijarro & José Moreno-Jiménez, 2011. "Mixed valuation methods: a combined AHP-GP procedure for individual and group multicriteria agricultural valuation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 221-238, October.
    12. Shaher H. Zyoud & Daniela Fuchs-Hanusch, 2019. "Comparison of Several Decision-Making Techniques: A Case of Water Losses Management in Developing Countries," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(05), pages 1551-1578, September.
    13. Alfredo Altuzarra & Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2022. "Identification of Homogeneous Groups of Actors in a Local AHP-Multiactor Context with a High Number of Decision-Makers: A Bayesian Stochastic Search," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, February.
    14. 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.
    15. L. Sun & B. S. Greenberg, 2006. "Multicriteria Group Decision Making: Optimal Priority Synthesis from Pairwise Comparisons," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 317-339, August.
    16. Alfredo Altuzarra & Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2019. "Homogeneous Groups of Actors in an AHP-Local Decision Making Context: A Bayesian Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-13, March.
    17. Petra Grošelj & Špela Pezdevšek Malovrh & Lidija Zadnik Stirn, 2011. "Methods based on data envelopment analysis for deriving group priorities in analytic hierarchy process," 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(3), pages 267-284, September.
    18. Bojan Srđević & Zorica Srđević & Milica Ilić & Senka Ždero, 2021. "Group model for evaluating the importance of Ramsar sites in Vojvodina Province of Serbia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10892-10909, July.
    19. Jacinto González-Pachón & Carlos Romero, 2007. "Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 123-132, October.
    20. Wu, Zhibin & Huang, Shuai & Xu, Jiuping, 2019. "Multi-stage optimization models for individual consistency and group consensus with preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 182-194.

    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:316:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03572-1. 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.