Management Science and Financial Engineering

The Korean Operations Research and Management Science Society (한국경영과학회)
권호 표지

Classification of the Analytic Hierarchy Process Approaches by Application Circumstances

  • Received : 2009.07.24
  • Accepted : 2010.01.19
  • Published : 2010.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper studies six different AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) approaches and suggests that the features of the approaches are classified by application circumstances in order to contribute to the applicability and quality usage of the AHP. Our study investigates the hierarchical principles and characteristics of the AHP, and historical debates on the AHP evaluation in which the six approaches have been involved. One of six approaches is an ANP (Analytic Network Process) application that is directly connected to AHP usage. The application differences among the six approaches are validated with a plain example. Then, the four circumstances of AHP applications are classified by two dimensions: the first dimension is whether or not the importance (weights) of criteria is independent of restrictively setting alternatives, and the second dimension is whether or not preference (priorities) of alternatives is independent of adding alternative(s) to or removing alternative(s) from the considering set of alternatives. Then featuring way of weighting criteria is classified. We suggest the distinguishing manners and describe the implications of the AHP application. Finally, we discuss rank reversal and multiplicative AHP.

Keywords

References

  1. Barzilai, J. and F. A. Lootsma, "Power relations and group aggregation in the multiplicative AHP and SMART," Journal of Multi-Criteria Decvision Analysis 6, 3 (1997), 155-165. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199705)6:3<155::AID-MCDA131>3.0.CO;2-4
  2. Belton, V. and T. Gear, "On a shortcoming of Saaty's method of Analytic Hierarchies," Omega International Journal of Management 11, 3 (1983), 228-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(83)90047-6
  3. Belton, V. and T. Gear, "The legitimacy of rank reversal-a comment," Omega International Journal of Management 13, 3 (1985), 143-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(85)90052-0
  4. Dyer, J. S., "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science 36,3 (1990), 249-258. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.249
  5. Dyer, J. S., "A clarification of "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science 36, 3 (1990), 274-275. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.274
  6. Forman, E. H., "Ideal and distributed synthesis modes for the analytic hierarchy process," George Washington University Working Paper (1993).
  7. Forman, E. H., "AHP is intended for more than expected value calculations," Decision Sciences 21, 2 (1990), 670-672. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1990.tb00343.x
  8. Forman, E. H. and S. I. Gass, "The Analytic Hierarchy Process-an exposition," Operations Research 49, 4 (2001), 469-486. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.49.4.469.11231
  9. Harker, P. T. and L. G. Vargas, "The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science 33, 11 (1987),1383-1403. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.33.11.1383
  10. Harker, P. T. and L. G. Vargas, "Reply to 'Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process' by J. S. Dyer," Management Science 36, 3 (1990), 269-273. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.269
  11. Kinoshita, E. and M. Nakanishi, "A proposal of new viewpoint in Analytic Hierarchic Process," Journal of Infrastructure Planning and Management IV-36-569 (1997),1-8.
  12. Kinoshita, E. and M. Nakanishi, "Proposal of new AHP model in light of dominant relationship among alternatives," Journal of the Operations Research Society of lapan 42, 2 (1999), 180-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0453-4514(99)80014-3
  13. Kinoshita, E., K. Sekitani, and J. Shi, "Mathematical properties of Dominant AHP and Concurrent Convergence Method," Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 45, 2 (2002), 198-213. https://doi.org/10.15807/jorsj.45.198
  14. Ishizaka A., D. Balkenborg, T. Kaplan, "Influence of aggregation and preference scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP," Multidisciplinary Workshop on Advances in Preference Handling, Italy, 2006.
  15. Perez, J., "Some comments on Saaty's AHP," Management Science 41, 6 (1995), 1091-1095. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.41.6.1091
  16. Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
  17. Saaty, T. L., "Axiomatic foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science 32,7 (1986), 841-855. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.7.841
  18. Saaty, T. L., "An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper Remarks on the Analytical Hierarchy Process," Management Science 36, 3 (1990), 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.259
  19. Saaty, T. L., "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research 74 (1994), 426-447. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)90222-4
  20. Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 1996.
  21. Saaty, T. L., "Decision making-the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (AHP/ANP)," Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering 13, 1 (2004), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-006-0151-5
  22. Saaty, T. L., Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 2005.
  23. Saaty, T. L. and L. G. Vargas, "The legitimacy of rank reversal," Omega International Journal of Management Science 12, 5 (1984), 513-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(84)90052-5
  24. Saaty, T. L., L. G. Vargas, and R. E. Wendell, "FEEDBACK: Assessing attribute weights by ratios," Omega International Journal of Management Science 11, 1 (1983), 9-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(83)90078-6
  25. Schoner, B. and W. C. Wedley, "Ambiguous criteria weights in AHP: consequences and solutions," Decision Sciences 20, 3 (1989), 462-475. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01561.x
  26. Schoner, B., W. C. Wedley, and E. U. Choo, "A rejoinder to Forman on AHP, with emphasis on the requirements of composite ratio scales," Decision Sciences 23,3 (1992), 509-517. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1992.tb00403.x
  27. Schoner, B., W. C. Wedley, and E. U. Choo, "A unified approach to AHP with linking pins," European Journal of Operational Research 64, 3 (1993),384-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(93)90128-A
  28. Sekitani, K. and H. Ueta, "Remarks the concurrent convergence method for a typical mutual evaluation system," Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan 47, 2 (2004), 82-95. https://doi.org/10.15807/jorsj.47.82
  29. Starn, A. and A. Pedro Duarte Silva, "On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research 145 (2003), 92-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00228-X
  30. Triantaphyllou, E., Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study, Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, 2000.
  31. Triantaphyllou, E., "Two new cases of rank reversals when the AHP and some of its additive variants are used that do not occur with the multiplicative AHP," Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 10, 1 (2001), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/mcda.284
  32. Vargas, L. G., "An overview of the Analytic Hierarchy Process and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research 48 (1990), 2-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90056-H
  33. Vargas, L. G., "Comments on Barzilai and Lootsma: Why the multiplicative AHP is invalid: A practical esample," Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis 6, 3 (1997), 169-170. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199705)6:3<169::AID-MCDA134>3.0.CO;2-P
  34. Watson, s. R. and A. N. S. Freeling, "Assessing attribute weights by ratios," Omega International Journal of Management Science 10, 6 (1982), 582-583. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(82)90061-5
  35. Watson, S. R. and A. N. S. Freeling, "Comment on: Assessing attribute weights by ratios," Omega International Journal of Management Science 11, 1 (1983),13.
  36. Yoon, M. S. and K. S. Whang, "Pooling Partial Pairwise Comparisons in the AHP," International Journal of Management Science 4,1 (1999), 35-56.
  37. Zahedi, F., "The Analytic Hierarchy Process-a survey of the method and its applications," Interfaces 16, 4 (1986), 96-108. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.16.4.96
  38. Zahir S., "Normalization and rank reversals in the additive analytic hierarchy process: a new analysis," International Journal of Operational Research 4, 4 (2009), 446-467. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJOR.2009.023538