Advertisement

Interval Judgements in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Statistical Perspective

  • Linda M. Haines
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 465)

Abstract

Two broad approaches are commonly used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process for deriving a suitable ranking of alternatives from an interval judgement matrix. In the present study these approaches are examined from a statistical perspective and are extended and developed accordingly. The ideas are introduced and illustrated by means of a simple example.

Keywords

Analytic Hierarchy Process interval judgements random convex combinations uniform distribution log uniform distribution. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arbel, A. (1989). “Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation”, European Journal of Operational Research, 43, 317–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arbel, A. and Vargas, L.G. (1992), “The Analytic Hierarchy Process with interval judgements”, Multiple Criteria Decision Making: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference held in Fairfax, Virginia, 1990, Eds. A. Goicoechea, L. Duckstein, and S. Zionts, 61–70.Google Scholar
  3. Arbel, A. and Vargas, L.G. (1993), “Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation”, European Journal of Operational Research, 69, 200–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Crawford, G. and Williams, C. (1985), “A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Islei, G. and Lockett, A.G. (1988), “Judgemental modelling based on geometric least square”, European Journal of Operational Research, 36, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Moreno-Jimenez, J.M. and Vargas, L.G. (1993), “A probabilistic study of preference structures in the Analytic Hierarchy Process with interval judgements”, Mathematical and Computational Modelling, 17, 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Olson, D.L. and Dorai, V.K. (1992), “Implementation of the centroid method of Solymosi and Dombi”, European Journal of Operational Research, 60, 117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Saaty, T.L. and Vargas, L.G. (1984), “Comparison of eigenvalue, logarithmic least squares and least squares methods in estimating ratios”, Mathematical Modelling, 5, 309–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Saaty, T.L. and Vargas, L.G. (1987), “Uncertainty and rank order in the Analytic Hierarchy Process”, European Journal of Operational Research, 32,107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Salo, A. and Hamalainen R.P. (1995), “Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons”, European Journal of Operational Research, 82, 458–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Solymosi, T. and Dombi, J. (1986), “A method for determining the weights of criteria: the centralized weights”, European Journal of Operational Research, 26, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda M. Haines
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Statistics and BiometryUniversity of Natal PietermaritzburgScottsvilleSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations