IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/jomega/v11y1983i3p228-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
  2. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
  3. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
  4. Macharis, Cathy & Springael, Johan & De Brucker, Klaas & Verbeke, Alain, 2004. "PROMETHEE and AHP: The design of operational synergies in multicriteria analysis.: Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(2), pages 307-317, March.
  5. Poyhonen, Mari & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(3), pages 569-585, March.
  6. Ulloa, Carlos & Nuñez, José M. & Lin, Chengxian & Rey, Guillermo, 2018. "AHP-based design method of a lightweight, portable and flexible air-based PV-T module for UAV shelter hangars," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 767-780.
  7. D'Adamo, Idiano & Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Gastaldi, Massimo & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "RES-T trajectories and an integrated SWOT-AHP analysis for biomethane. Policy implications to support a green revolution in European transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
  8. 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.
  9. Van den Honert, R. C., 1998. "Stochastic group preference modelling in the multiplicative AHP: A model of group consensus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 99-111, October.
  10. Roszkowska, Ewa & Wachowicz, Tomasz, 2015. "Application of fuzzy TOPSIS to scoring the negotiation offers in ill-structured negotiation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 920-932.
  11. Chen, Hongyi & Kocaoglu, Dundar F., 2008. "A sensitivity analysis algorithm for hierarchical decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 266-288, February.
  12. Antonopoulos, I.-S. & Perkoulidis, G. & Logothetis, D. & Karkanias, C., 2014. "Ranking municipal solid waste treatment alternatives considering sustainability criteria using the analytical hierarchical process tool," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 149-159.
  13. Millet, Ido & Saaty, Thomas L., 2000. "On the relativity of relative measures - accommodating both rank preservation and rank reversals in the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 205-212, February.
  14. Rezaei, Jafar, 2015. "Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 49-57.
  15. Liao, Huchang & Wu, Xingli, 2020. "DNMA: A double normalization-based multiple aggregation method for multi-expert multi-criteria decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
  16. Yang, Taho & Chen, Mu-Chen & Hung, Chih-Ching, 2007. "Multiple attribute decision-making methods for the dynamic operator allocation problem," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 73(5), pages 285-299.
  17. Poyhonen, Mari & Vrolijk, Hans & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 2001. "Behavioral and procedural consequences of structural variation in value trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 216-227, October.
  18. Darshini, Dina & Dwivedi, Puneet & Glenk, Klaus, 2013. "Capturing stakeholders´ views on oil palm-based biofuel and biomass utilisation in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1128-1137.
  19. Wang, Xiaojun & Chan, Hing Kai & Li, Dong, 2015. "A case study of an integrated fuzzy methodology for green product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(1), pages 212-223.
  20. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
  21. Ahammed, Faisal & Azeem, Abdullahil, 2013. "Selection of the most appropriate package of Solar Home System using Analytic Hierarchy Process model in rural areas of Bangladesh," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 6-11.
  22. 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).
  23. Finan, J. S. & Hurley, W. J., 1999. "Transitive calibration of the AHP verbal scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 367-372, January.
  24. Mesa, Pascual & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Berbel, Julio, 2008. "Análisis multicriterio de preferencias sociales en gestión hídrica bajo la Directiva Marco del Agua," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(02), pages 1-22.
  25. Sánchez-Lozano, J.M. & García-Cascales, M.S. & Lamata, M.T., 2016. "GIS-based onshore wind farm site selection using Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making methods. Evaluating the case of Southeastern Spain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 86-102.
  26. Kumar, N. Vinod & Ganesh, L. S., 1996. "A simulation-based evaluation of the approximate and the exact eigenvector methods employed in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 656-662, December.
  27. Mkedder, Nadjim & Das, Manish, 2024. "Metaverse integration challenges: An in-depth ISM and MICMAC analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
  28. Wedley, William C. & Choo, Eng Ung & Schoner, Bertram, 2001. "Magnitude adjustment for AHP benefit/cost ratios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 342-351, January.
  29. Huizingh, Eelko K. R. E. & Vrolijk, Hans C. J., 1997. "Extending the applicability of the analytic hierarchy process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 29-39, March.
  30. 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.
  31. Liu, Qizhi, 2022. "Identifying and correcting the defects of the Saaty analytic hierarchy/network process: A comparative study of the Saaty analytic hierarchy/network process and the Markov chain-based analytic network ," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
  32. Contreras, Francisco & Hanaki, Keisuke & Aramaki, Toshiya & Connors, Stephen, 2008. "Application of analytical hierarchy process to analyze stakeholders preferences for municipal solid waste management plans, Boston, USA," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 979-991.
  33. Nikou, Shahrokh & Mezei, József, 2013. "Evaluation of mobile services and substantial adoption factors with Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 915-929.
  34. Morton, Alec, 2015. "Measurement issues in the evaluation of projects in a project portfolio," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 789-796.
  35. Joaquín Pérez, José L. Jimeno, Ethel Mokotoff, 2001. "Another potential strong shortcoming of AHP," Doctorado en Economía- documentos de trabajo 8/02, Programa de doctorado en Economía. Universidad de Alcalá., revised 01 Jun 2002.
  36. Lin, Lie Chien & Sharp, Gunter P., 1999. "Application of the integrated framework for the plant layout evaluation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 118-138, July.
  37. Stam, Antonie & Duarte Silva, A. Pedro, 2003. "On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 92-108, February.
  38. 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.
  39. Jain, Bharat A. & Nag, Barin N., 1996. "A decision-support model for investment decisions in new ventures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 473-486, May.
  40. Lin, Jennifer Shu-Jen & Chou, Shuo-Yan & Chouhuang, Wayne T. & Hsu, C.P., 2008. "Note on "Wash criterion in analytic hierarchy process"," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 444-447, February.
  41. Nixon, J.D. & Dey, P.K. & Davies, P.A., 2010. "Which is the best solar thermal collection technology for electricity generation in north-west India? Evaluation of options using the analytical hierarchy process," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5230-5240.
  42. Ho, William & Ma, Xin, 2018. "The state-of-the-art integrations and applications of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 399-414.
  43. Belton, Valerie & Goodwin, Paul, 1996. "Remarks on the application of the analytic hierarchy process to judgmental forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 155-161, March.
  44. Mulliner, Emma & Malys, Naglis & Maliene, Vida, 2016. "Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 146-156.
  45. Leung, Lawrence C. & Cao, Dong, 2001. "On the efficacy of modeling multi-attribute decision problems using AHP and Sinarchy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 39-49, July.
  46. Akbari, Negar & Irawan, Chandra A. & Jones, Dylan F. & Menachof, David, 2017. "A multi-criteria port suitability assessment for developments in the offshore wind industry," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PA), pages 118-133.
  47. Aguaron, Juan & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria, 2000. "Local stability intervals in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 113-132, August.
  48. Lai, S-K., 1995. "A preference-based interpretation of AHP," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 453-462, August.
  49. Carmone, Frank J. & Kara, Ali & Zanakis, Stelios H., 1997. "A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(3), pages 538-553, November.
  50. Wang, Xiaoting & Triantaphyllou, Evangelos, 2008. "Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-63, February.
  51. 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.
  52. Wang, Ying-Ming & Chin, Kwai-Sang, 2009. "A new data envelopment analysis method for priority determination and group decision making in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(1), pages 239-250, May.
  53. Bolloju, N., 2001. "Aggregation of analytic hierarchy process models based on similarities in decision makers' preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 499-508, February.
  54. Sureeyatanapas, Panitas & Sriwattananusart, Kawinpob & Niyamosoth, Thanawath & Sessomboon, Weerapat & Arunyanart, Sirawadee, 2018. "Supplier selection towards uncertain and unavailable information: An extension of TOPSIS method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 69-79.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.