一种加性AHP法的构造及应用

首先分析了 Satty的传统 AHP法的缺陷 ,然后给出了加性 AHP法的构造原理及权值求法 ,并以一实例说明加性 AHP法在多指标决策分析中的应用 .最后指出加性 AHP法是一种较之传统 AHP法更方便可行的方法 .     

AHP中的权向量的注记

阐述了层次分析法的权向量线性 ,拟线性和非线性表示 .讨论了 AHP,模糊 AHP等模型及随机性AHP的保序性 .并给出了其有关的应用实例     

带有熵权-AHP约束锥的DEA模型

在DEA模型中当考虑较多的投入和产出指标时,容易产生决策单元的过度有效性,影响模型的分析效能.因此有相关研究将AHP约束锥引入DEA模型中,不仅有效地限制了DEA模型指标权重的选择自由性,也能更好地将决策者的主观偏好反映在模型中.但引入AHP约束锥产生的主观性会影响到DEA效率评估的客观性.引入熵权法概念,借鉴其客观赋权的思想,将其与AHP约束锥相结合,不仅保留了带有.AHP约束锥的DEA模型的优点,也中和了AHP约束锥的主观性,保证了DEA模型的相对客观性.     

AHP的算法及其比较分析

本文简述了运用AHP方法解决实际问题时的基本步骤、排序原理。重点介绍了AHP的六种常用算法的基本原理、算法步骤,并对这几种算法作了初步的比较与分析。     

正交试验层次分析法

提出了一种正交试验数据分析的新方法——正交试验层次分析法(AnalyticHierarchyProcess,简称AHP).应用层次分析(AHP)对不考虑交互作用的正交试验进行统计分析,得出各因素各水平对试验结果的影响权重,从而确定因素的主次顺序及最佳条件.实验结果表明,应用AHP对正交试验进行分析得到的结论与传统的直观分析法一致.     

基于层次分析法的毕业论文(设计)综合评价方法

毕业论文是高校实施教学计划的重要环节.针对目前很多高校毕业论文评价方法中存在的一些问题,结合论文评价过程的相关特点,在层次分析法(AHP)的基础上提出了群组AHP模型和模糊AHP模型两种决策优化模型,给出了基于这两种模型的高校学生毕业论文综合评价方法.实践表明,在对学生论文进行评价的过程中,方法具有合理、公正、简便、灵活、易于推广的特点,开发的基于该方法的毕业论文评价系统具有很强的应用价值.     

群组AHP中区间判断矩阵的一致性研究

对群组AHP中区间判断矩阵的一致性进行了研究，论证了在对同一决策问题的S个区间判断矩阵是一致性可接受的情况下，它们的加权算术平均综合区间判断矩阵也是一致性可接受的，从而为群组AHP的广泛应用提供了一个理论依据。     

气象灾害评估分析的AHM方法研究

文章采用属性层次模型(AHM)对主要气象灾害的风险承受能力与控制能力进行评价分析,并与层次分析法(AHP)进行比较,结果表明属性层次模型(AHM)比层次分析法(AHP)更便于计算,为气象灾害风险承受能力与控制能力的评价与风险决策问题提供了更实用更科学的依据。     

一类方案逆选问题及其改进

针对AHP和线性整数（0～1）规划结合应用时产生的一类方案逆选问题。分析了问题产生的原因，提出了基于AHP区间估计和参数规划的改进模型。与原有模型相比，改进模型提供给决策者更多的信息，从而尽可能地减少偏差和错误。最后，通过一个算例验证了模型有效性。     

用AHP方法确定多目标的优先等级

本文给出了一种确定目标规划问题中多目标的优先等级的方法—— AHP方法 .     

Does AHP help us make a choice? An experimental evaluation

In this paper, we use experimental economics methods to test how well Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) fares as a choice support system in a real decision problem. AHP provides a ranking that we statistically compare with three additional rankings given by the subjects in the experiment: one at the beginning, one after providing AHP with the necessary pair-wise comparisons and one after learning the ranking provided by AHP. While the rankings vary widely across subjects, we observe that for each individual all four rankings are similar. Hence, subjects are consistent and AHP is, for the most part, able to replicate their rankings. Furthermore, while the rankings are similar, we do find that the AHP ranking helps the decision makers reformulate their choices by taking into account suggestions made by AHP.     

基于DS/AHP的供应商选择方法

供应商选择方法有很多种，在众多的方法中层次分析法以能够将定性指标定量化而被广泛应用于供应商选择决策中。考虑到供应商选择问题中包含有很多的不确定性而证据理论在处理不确定问题又有着独特的优点，因此本文采用了一种由层次分析法和证据理论结合而产生的DS／AHP决策方法，并将其应用于供应商选择决策问题中，该方法综合了层次分析法和证据理论的优点，可以更科学的进行供应商选择决策，最后通过一个例子说明这种方法在供应商选择中的应用。     

Group decision making in a multiple criteria environment: A case using the AHP in software selection

This paper reports the results of a case study where the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique was employed to support the selection of a multi-media authorizing system (MAS) in a group decision environment. Three MAS products were identified and ultimately ranked using the AHP. Six software engineers, who are technically competent and experienced, participated in our study. These engineers were trained to use the AHP and asked to apply this technique to select the most appropriate MAS product for adoption. A post-study survey and interview were conducted with all the engineers to collect further feedback on the use of the AHP, as compared to their frequently used Delphi technique, in supporting group decisions. The experiment results and survey findings indicated that the AHP is preferable to Delphi as the AHP helps group members center a discussion around objectives, rather than alternatives. We also found the AHP to be more conducive to consensus building in group decision settings.     

On the efficacy of modeling multi-attribute decision problems using AHP and Sinarchy

AHP is a multi-attribute decision-making methodology widely used by both practitioners and researchers. In the 1980s, critics had raised questions regarding its proper use. There were quite a few suggested modifications to overcome the supposed limitations of AHP. These modifications are themselves limited as they typically impede the applicability of AHP. In this paper, we revisit some of the earlier criticisms. We have two objectives (1) to articulate the proper use of AHP by highlighting the assumptions and implications underlying AHP, and (2) to show that Sinarchy can be used to address the earlier criticisms while maintaining the applicability of the AHP framework. We identify that in AHP, tradeoffs between criteria vary amongst individual alternatives and are dependent on the alternative’s proportion of contribution towards each criterion. For problems where tradeoffs between criteria are in terms of their relative measurements, Sinarchy should be used. It is also shown that Sinarchy can prevent rank reversal. Illustrative examples are included throughout.     

A comparison of the Saaty's AHP and modified AHP for right and left eigenvector inconsistency

Over the past two decades, Saaty's Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been developed to solve decision problems in various fields by prioritization of alternatives using eigenvectors and manipulations in matrix algebra. However, a fundamental problem called “Right and Left Eigenvector Inconsistency” has been observed which may yield inconsistent results using the right and the left eigenvectors. A new method known as the Modified AHP has been recently devised by H.A. Donegan, F.J. Dodd, T.B.M. McMaster, The Statistician 41 (1992) 295–302 who claimed that the inconsistency problem can be effectively reduced. This work is an attempt to compare the Saaty's AHP (SAHP) and the Modified AHP (MAHP) using 42 models comprising 294 reciprocal matrices. It was discovered that the Modified AHP is no better than the Saaty's AHP.     

层次分析法判断矩阵可靠性探讨

层次分析法判断矩阵中可能会存在相互矛盾的一系列判断元素.通过一个房产评估例子论述这种矛盾造成的原因.为解决这类矛盾,对层次分析法的判断矩阵进行改进:判断矩阵的元素不是通过直接两两比较重要性而得,而是首先按照一定的标准建立评分矩阵,然后对评分矩阵进行矩阵变换形成判断矩阵.根据AHP法改进判断矩阵形成的过程,提出判别层次分析法判断矩阵可靠性的方法.     

Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: Fallacy of the popular methods

The fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (fuzzy AHP) is a very popular decision making method and literally thousands of papers have been published about it. However, we find the basic logic of this approach has problems. From its methodology, the definition and operational rules of fuzzy numbers not only oppose the main logic of fuzzy set theory, but also oppose the basic principles of the AHP. In dealing with the outcomes, fuzzy AHP does not give a generally accepted method to rank fuzzy numbers and a way to check the validity of the results. Besides, we discuss the validity of the Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process (AHP/ANP) in complex and uncertain environments and find that fuzzy ANP is a false proposition because there is no fuzzy priority in the super matrix which provides the basis for the ANP. Although fuzzy AHP has been applied in many cases and cited hundreds of times, we hoped that those who use fuzzy AHP would understand the problems associated with this method.     

Numerical scales generated individually for analytic hierarchy process

Because individual interpretations of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) linguistic scale vary for each user, this study proposes a novel framework that AHP decision makers can use to generate numerical scales individually, based on the 2-tuple linguistic modeling of AHP scale problems. By using the concept of transitive calibration, individual characteristics in understanding the AHP linguistic scale are first defined. An algorithm is then proposed for detecting the individual characteristics from the linguistic pairwise comparison data that is associated with each of the AHP individual decision makers. Finally, a nonlinear programming model is proposed to generate individual numerical scales that optimally match the obtained individual characteristics. Two well-known numerical examples are re-examined using the proposed framework to demonstrate its validity.     

DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis,including an understanding of uncertainty

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was developed to aid decision makers to rank or sort information based on a number of criteria. A recent advance is the DS/AHP method which incorporates the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence with AHP. This method allows judgements on groups of decision alternatives (DA) to be made, it also offers a measure of uncertainty in the final results. In this paper a mathematical analysis of DS/AHP is included, constructing the functional form of the preference weightings given to groups of DA. These functions allow an understanding of the appropriateness of the rating scale values used in the DS/AHP method, through evaluating the range of uncertainty able to be expressed by the decision maker.