A two-phase algorithm for consensus building in AHP-group decision making

Group decision making through the AHP has received significant attention in contemporary research, the primary focus of which has been on the issues of consistency and consensus building. In this paper, we concentrate on the latter and present a two-phase algorithm based on the optimal clustering of decision makers (members of a group) into sub groups followed by consensus building both within sub groups and between sub groups. Two-dimensional Sammon’s mapping is proposed as a tool for generating an approximate visualization of sub groups identified in multidimensional vector space, while the consensus convergence model is suggested for reaching agreement amongst individuals in and between sub groups. As a given, all decision makers evaluate the same decision elements within the AHP framework and produce individual scores of these decision elements. The consensual scores are obtained through the iterative procedure and the final scores are declared as the group decision. The results of two selected numerical examples are compared with two sets of results: the results obtained by the commonly used geometric mean aggregation method and also the results obtained if the consensus convergence model is applied directly without the prior clustering of the decision makers. The comparisons indicated the expected differences among the aggregation schemes and the final group scores. The matrices of respect values in the consensus convergence model, obtained for cases when the decision makers are optimally clustered and when they are not, show that in the latter case the decision makers receive lower weights of respect from other members in the group. Various tests showed that our approach is efficient in cases when no clusters can be visually and undoubtedly identified, especially if the number of group members is high.     

Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence

We study various methods of aggregating individual judgments and individual priorities in group decision making with the AHP. The focus is on the empirical properties of the various methods, mainly on the extent to which the various aggregation methods represent an accurate approximation of the priority vector of interest. We identify five main classes of aggregation procedures which provide identical or very similar empirical expressions for the vectors of interest. We also propose a method to decompose in the AHP response matrix distortions due to random errors and perturbations caused by cognitive biases predicted by the mathematical psychology literature. We test the decomposition with experimental data and find that perturbations in group decision making caused by cognitive distortions are more important than those caused by random errors. We propose methods to correct the systematic distortions.     

Eliciting and mapping qualitative preferences to numeric rankings in group decision making

Group work is becoming the norm in organizations. From strategy planning committees to quality management teams, organizational members are collaborating on problem solving. One area of team support that is often desired is the scoring and ranking of decision alternatives on qualitative/subjective domains, and the aggregation of individual preferences into group preferences. In this paper we present a new conceptual approach to qualitative preference elicitation and aggregation. This approach is based on well established decision analysis techniques. It significantly advances the state of the art of group decision making by addressing four common limitations: (1) the inability to deal with vagueness of human decision makers in articulating preferences; (2) difficulties in mapping qualitative evaluation to numeric estimates; (3) problems in aggregating individual preferences into meaningful group preference; and (4) the lack of simple user friendly techniques for dealing with a large number of decision alternatives. Our approach is easy to implement in stand alone personal computers and groupware. We illustrate this with a real-world problem.     

Influence of aggregation and measurement scale on ranking a compromise alternative in AHP

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most popular multi-attribute decision aid methods. However, within AHP, there are several competing preference measurement scales and aggregation techniques. In this paper, we compare these possibilities using a decision problem with an inherent trade-off between two criteria. A decision-maker has to choose among three alternatives: two extremes and one compromise. Six different measurement scales described previously in the literature and the new proposed logarithmic scale are considered for applying the additive and the multiplicative aggregation techniques. The results are compared with the standard consumer choice theory. We find that with the geometric and power scales a compromise is never selected when aggregation is additive and rarely when aggregation is multiplicative, while the logarithmic scale used with the multiplicative aggregation most often selects the compromise that is desirable by consumer choice theory.     

A new distance measure including the weak preference relation: Application to the multiple criteria aggregation procedure for mixed evaluations

We introduce a new distance measure between two preorders that captures indifference, strict preference, weak preference and incomparability relations. This measure is the first to capture weak preference relations. We illustrate how this distance measure affords decision makers greater modeling power to capture their preferences, or uncertainty and ambiguity around them, by using our proposed distance measure in a multiple criteria aggregation procedure for mixed evaluations.     

Group preference aggregation with the AHP – implications for multiple-issue agendas

We extend different group preference aggregation procedures applied in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to multiple-issue decision problems. We demonstrate how existing procedures that are specifically developed for single-issue decisions will generally fail to generate Pareto optimal agreements when applied to multiple issues. By relating these procedures to formal concepts of social choice theory, we develop a utilitarian weighted arithmetic mean method of aggregation that ensures efficiency. Our approach thus provides a theoretical basis for designing the AHP to implement social choice functions in practice.     

A goal programming model for incomplete interval multiplicative preference relations and its application in group decision-making

In decision making problems, there may be the cases where the decision makers express their judgements by using preference relations with incomplete information. Then one of the key issues is how to estimate the missing preference values. In this paper, we introduce an incomplete interval multiplicative preference relation and give the definitions of consistent and acceptable incomplete ones, respectively. Based on the consistency property of interval multiplicative preference relations, a goal programming model is proposed to complement the acceptable incomplete one. A new algorithm of obtaining the priority vector from incomplete interval multiplicative preference relations is given. The goal programming model is further applied to group decision-making (GDM) where the experts evaluate their preferences as acceptable incomplete interval multiplicative preference relations. An interval weighted geometric averaging (IWGA) operator is proposed to aggregate individual preference relations into a social one. Furthermore, the social interval multiplicative preference relation owns acceptable consistency when every individual one is acceptably consistent. Two numerical examples are carried out to show the efficiency of the proposed goal programming model and the algorithms.     

Aggregation of analytic hierarchy process models based on similarities in decision makers’ preferences

The analytic hierarchy process is widely used in both individual and group decision making environments. In this paper we investigate its applicability to model a specific class of decentralized decision problems where many decision makers take individual subjective decisions using locally available information. In such subjective decision making environments, it is neither possible nor appropriate to use group preference aggregation techniques to model the problem as a single group decision problem. An approach to identify homogeneous subgroups of decision makers based on similarities in preferences and to aggregate preferences within each subgroup is proposed. This approach is validated using employment preferences of 70 subjects modeled using the analytic hierarchy process.     

Aggregation of utility-based individual preferences for group decision-making

Multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) elicits an individual decision maker’s preferences for single attributes and develops a utility function by mathematics formulation to add up the preferences of the entire set of attributes when assessing alternatives. A common aggregation method of MAUT for group decisions is the simple additive weighting (SAW) method, which does not consider the different preferential levels and preferential ranks for individual decision makers’ assessments of alternatives in a decision group, and thus seems too intuitive in achieving the consensus and commitment for group decision aggregation. In this paper, the preferential differences denoting the preference degrees among different alternatives and preferential priorities denoting the favorite ranking of the alternatives for each decision maker are both considered and aggregated to construct the utility discriminative values for assessing alternatives in a decision group. A comparative analysis is performed to compare the proposed approach to the SAW model, and a satisfaction index is used to investigate the satisfaction levels of the final two resulting group decisions. In addition, a feedback interview is conducted to understand the subjective perceptions of decision makers while examining the results obtained from these two approaches for the second practical case. Both investigation results show that the proposed approach is able to achieve a more satisfying and agreeable group decision than that of the SAW method.     

Performance evaluation: An integrated method using data envelopment analysis and fuzzy preference relations

In a multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) context, the decision maker needs to provide his preferences over a set of decision alternatives and constructs a preference relation and then use the derived priority vector of the preference to rank various alternatives. This paper proposes an integrated approach to rate decision alternatives using data envelopment analysis and preference relations. This proposed approach includes three stages. First, pairwise efficiency scores are computed using two DEA models: the CCR model and the proposed cross-evaluation DEA model. Second, the pairwise efficiency scores are then utilized to construct the fuzzy preference relation and the consistent fuzzy preference relation. Third, by use of the row wise summation technique, we yield a priority vector, which is used for ranking decision-making units (DMUs). For the case of a single output and a single input, the preference relation can be directly obtained from the original sample data. The proposed approach is validated by two numerical examples.     

A lexicographical compromise method for multiple criteria group decision problems with imprecise information

This paper addresses multiple criteria group decision making problems where each group member offers imprecise information on his/her preferences about the criteria. In particular we study the inclusion of this partial information in the decision problem when the individuals’ preferences do not provide a vector of common criteria weights and a compromise preference vector of weights has to be determined as part of the decision process in order to evaluate a finite set of alternatives. We present a method where the compromise is defined by the lexicographical minimization of the maximum disagreement between the value assigned to the alternatives by the group members and the evaluation induced by the compromise weights.     

社会网络环境下基于“信任—知识”模型的风险性大群体应急决策方法

针对大群体应急决策专家之间信任关系及其传递引发的决策风险,以及由于大群体中个体偏好差异较大导致生成独立聚集等问题。首先,提出一个“信任—知识模型”对决策专家之间的信任关系进行集成和传递,并根据决策专家的信任风险偏好得出决策专家之间的信任知识度网络;其次,利用Louvain算法对信任知识度网络进行聚类,高效快速的获得若干个聚集,并用社会网络分析技术确定每个决策者和聚集的权重;然后对每个聚集中的决策者偏好进行集结,并综合决策者给出的信息对备选决策方案进行排序。最后,通过案例分析和对比验证了所提方法的合理性与有效性。     

An integrated model-based interactive approach to FMAGDM with incomplete preference information

Incomplete fuzzy preference relations, incomplete multiplicative preference relations, and incomplete linguistic preference relations are very useful to express decision makers’ incomplete preferences over attributes or alternatives in the process of decision making under fuzzy environments. The aim of this paper is to investigate fuzzy multiple attribute group decision making problems where the attribute values are represented in intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and the information on attribute weights is provided by decision makers by means of one or some of the different preference structures, including weak ranking, strict ranking, difference ranking, multiple ranking, interval numbers, incomplete fuzzy preference relations, incomplete multiplicative preference relations, and incomplete linguistic preference relations. We transform all individual intuitionistic fuzzy decision matrices into the interval decision matrices and construct their expected decision matrices, and then aggregate all these expected decision matrices into a collective one. We establish an integrated model by unifying the collective decision matrix and all the given different structures of incomplete weight preference information, and develop an integrated model-based approach to interacting with the decision makers so as to adjust all the inconsistent incomplete fuzzy preference relations, inconsistent incomplete linguistic preference relations and inconsistent incomplete multiplicative preference relations into the ones with acceptable consistency. The developed approach can derive the attribute weights and the ranking of the alternatives directly from the integrated model, and thus it has the following prominent characteristics: (1) it does not need to construct the complete fuzzy preference relations, complete linguistic preference relations and complete multiplicative preference relations from the incomplete fuzzy preference relations, incomplete linguistic preference relations and incomplete multiplicative preference relations, respectively; (2) it does not need to unify the different structures of incomplete preferences, and thus can simplify the calculation and avoid distorting the given preference information; and (3) it can sufficiently reflect and adjust the subjective desirability of decision makers in the process of interaction. A practical example is also provided to illustrate the developed approach.     

A modified procedure for synthesising ratio judgements in the analytic hierarchy process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been widely applied to solve problems arising in group decision making, by synthesising different or conflicting judgements. However, directly synthesising conflicting judgements by calculating the geometric mean of preference weights (ratios) in AHP may not reach consensus from all members in a decision making group, especially, when those members represent the stakeholders of the decision making problem. This study proposes a new method that uses the genetic algorithm and utility function to synthesise preference weights to prevent this fallacy occurring when implementing the classical AHP approach. Using the proposed method, the final decision can be achieved with only minimally-adjusted preference weights.     

A chi-square method for obtaining a priority vector from multiplicative and fuzzy preference relations

Decision makers (DMs)’ preferences on decision alternatives are often characterized by multiplicative or fuzzy preference relations. This paper proposes a chi-square method (CSM) for obtaining a priority vector from multiplicative and fuzzy preference relations. The proposed CSM can be used to obtain a priority vector from either a multiplicative preference relation (i.e. a pairwise comparison matrix) or a fuzzy preference relation or a group of multiplicative preference relations or a group of fuzzy preference relations or their mixtures. Theorems and algorithm about the CSM are developed. Three numerical examples are examined to illustrate the applications of the CSM and its advantages.     

Comparison of first aggregation and last aggregation in fuzzy group TOPSIS

The Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), one of the major multi attribute decision making (MADM) techniques, ranks the alternatives according to their distances from the ideal and the negative ideal solution. In real evaluation and decision making problems, it is vital to involve several people and experts from different functional areas in decision making process. Also under many conditions, crisp data are inadequate to model real-life situations, since human judgments including preferences are often vague and cannot estimate his preference with an exact numerical value. Therefore aggregation of fuzzy concept, group decision making and TOPSIS methods that we denote “fuzzy group TOPSIS” is more practical than original TOPSIS.     

三角模糊偏好下冲突型多属性群决策方法研究

针对三角模糊偏好下冲突型群决策问题,本文提出一种新的决策方法。在冲突消解阶段,用三角模糊数表示决策专家偏好,定义两三角模糊数型偏好矢量间的相似度,通过计算专家对各个方案的偏好矢量与各方案的群偏好矢量间的相似度,以此为基础定义专家的冲突测度。给出阈值和协商机制调控专家的冲突测度,直到所有的专家的冲突测度都小于给定阈值,进入决策阶段。在决策阶段,利用三角模糊数的期望函数确定属性权重,计算各个方案群偏好矢量与理想方案偏好矢量之间的加权相似度,由加权相似度大小排列决策,选出最优方案。最后给出案例应用,利用Matlab画出各方案的冲突测度图,数值结果表明本文方法的可行性及有效性。     

On Sensitivity Analysis in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a popular multiobjectivetool of decision analysis. We describe several ways of enhancingthis decision-making process through the use of sensitivityanalysis, an extension to AHP which is relatively unstudied.Sensitivity analysis can be useful in eliminating alternatives,enhancing a group decision process, or in providing informationas to the robustness of a decision. Concentrating at the firstlevel of the decision hierarchy, we create a weight space whichrepresents all possible combinations of weights for the first-levelobjectives. This weight space is then partitioned into subsets,and spatial information is generated from it. We use a smallexample to demonstrate our ideas.     

A consistency and consensus-based method to group decision making with interval linguistic preference relations

Preference relations are a powerful tool to address decision-making problems. In some situations, because of the complexity of decision-making problems and the inherent uncertainty, the decision makers cannot express their preferences by using numerical values. Interval linguistic preference relations, which are more reliable and informative for the decision-makers’ preferences, are a good choice to cope with this issue. Just as with the other types of preference relations, the consistency and consensus analysis is very importance to ensure the reasonable ranking order by using interval linguistic preference relations. Considering this situation, this paper introduces a consistency concept for interval linguistic preference relations. To measure the consistency of interval linguistic preference relations, a consistency measure is defined. Then, a consistency-based programming model is built, by which the consistent linguistic preference relations with respect to each object can be obtained. To cope with the inconsistency case, two models for deriving the adjusted consistent linguistic preference relations are constructed. Then, a consistency-based programming model to estimate the missing values is built. After that, we present a group consensus index and present some of its desirable properties. Furthermore, a group consensus-based model to determine the weights of the decision makers with respect to each object is established. Finally, an approach to group decision making with interval linguistic preference relations is developed, which is based on the consistency and consensus analysis. Meanwhile, the associated numerical examples are offered to illustrate the application of the procedure.     

A fuzzy preference relation in the vector maximum problem

A new approach to the compromise solution concept for the vector maximum problem is considered. It is assumed in this approach that one may specify a fuzzy preference relation in the alternative space reflecting the objective functions and the decision maker's preferences. The maximal nondominated alternative for this relation is proposed as a compromise solution to the initial problem. Properties of the compromise solution are analysed under different assumptions concerning the initial problem as well as the accepted fuzzy preference relation.