Using the analytic hierarchy process in a dynamic environment

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a decision analysis technique that uses judgements from a group of relevant decision makers along with hierarchical decomposition to derive a set of ratioscaled measures for decision alternatives. This paper addresses implementation issues for the AHP when the alternatives become available to the decision maker sequentially rather than simultaneously. Uncertainty about the value of future alternatives and the number of alternatives is included. We present a technique similar to the classic “secretary problem” of operations research and describe some sample results of using this technique. The procedure involves prioritizing criteria of possible alternatives before the alternatives became available, scoring the alternatives and then comparing the score of an alternative with an easily computed (through a dynamic programming recursion) critical value.     

Pruning of decision alternatives in multiple criteria decision making,based on the Uta method for estimating utilities

A new interactive method for the progressive elimination of elements from a finite set of decision alternatives is proposed. A sequence of alternatives is presented to the decision maker, who places each new alternative presented in rank order relative to the earlier alternatives evaluated. This ranking of elements in a subset of the decision space is used to eliminate other alternatives from further consideration. The approach is broadly based on the UTA method for utility assessment. The emphasis is not, however, on assessing a utility function as such; instead the class of utility functions is used to eliminate elements of the decision space, when the optimality of such elements is inconsistent with the presumed properties of the utility function and the rank orderings given. In this way, the decision maker need only evaluate a relatively small subset of the decision space, before all remaining alternatives are eliminated. The new procedure is illustrated by two numerical examples.     

Probabilistic judgments specified partially in the analytic hierarchy process

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a decision-making tool which yields priorities for decision alternatives. This paper proposes a new approach to elicit and synthesize expert assessments for the group decision process in the AHP. These new elicitations are given as partial probabilistic specifications of the entries of pairwise comparisons matrices. For a particular entry of the matrix, the partial probabilistic elicitations could arise in the form of either probability assignments regarding the chance of that entry falling in specified intervals or selected quantiles for that entry. A new class of models is introduced to provide methods for processing this partial probabilistic information. One advantage of this approach is that it allows to generate as many pairwise comparison matrices of the decision alternatives as one desires. This, in turn, allows us to determine the statistical significance of the priorities of decision alternatives.     

Ranking multicriteria alternatives: The method ZAPROS III

The new version of the method for the construction of partial order on the set of multicriteria alternatives is presented. This method belongs to the family of verbal decision analysis (VDA) methods and gives a more efficient means of problem solution. The method is based on psychologically valid operations for information elicitation from a decision maker: comparisons of two distances between the evaluations on the ordinal scales of two criteria. The information received from a decision maker is used for the construction of a binary relation between a pair of alternatives which yields preference, indifference and incomparability relations. The method allows construction of a partial order on the set of given alternatives as well as on the set of all possible alternatives. The illustrative example is given.     

Dominance and potential optimality in multiple criteria decision analysis with imprecise information

This paper discusses multiple criteria models of decision analysis with finite sets of alternatives. A weighted sum of criteria is used to evaluate the performance of alternatives. Information about the weights is assumed to be in the form of arbitrary linear constraints. Conditions for checking dominance and potential optimality of decision alternatives are presented. In the case of testing potential optimality, the proposed appoach leads to the consideration of a couple of mutually dual linear programming problems. The analysis of these problems gives valuable information for the decision maker. In particular, if a decision alternative is not potentially optimal, then a mixed alternative dominating it is defined by a solution to one of the LP problems. This statement generalizes similar results known for some special cases. The interpretation of the mixed alternative is discussed and compared to its analogue in a data envelopment analysis context.     

多数满意规则的一般陪审团概率及其极限

对于在一陪审团(群体)中,每一个决策者正确判断方案的满意性都具有各自不同概率的情况,建立了陪审团(群体)正确判断方案满意性概率的一般形式的定理.同时,证明了该陪审团(群体)正确判断方案满意性的概率,将随着参与决策者人数的增加趋于它的极限1.     

Rank reversals in multi-criteria decision analysis with statistical modelling of ratio-scale pairwise comparisons

In multi-criteria decision analysis, the overall performance of decision alternatives is evaluated with respect to several, generally conflicting decision criteria. One approach to perform the multi-criteria decision analysis is to use ratio-scale pairwise comparisons concerning the performance of decision alternatives and the importance of decision criteria. In this approach, a classical problem has been the phenomenon of rank reversals. In particular, when a new decision alternative is added to a decision problem, and while the assessments concerning the original decision alternatives remain unchanged, the new alternative may cause rank reversals between the utility estimates of the original decision alternatives. This paper studies the connections between rank reversals and the potential inconsistency of the utility assessments in the case of ratio-scale pairwise comparisons data. The analysis was carried out by recently developed statistical modelling techniques so that the inconsistency of the assessments was measured according to statistical estimation theory. Several type of decision problems were analysed and the results showed that rank reversals caused by inconsistency are natural and acceptable. On the other hand, rank reversals caused by the traditional arithmetic-mean aggregation rule are not in line with the ratio-scale measurement of utilities, whereas geometric-mean aggregation does not cause undesired rank reversals.     

Some Theory and an Approach to Solving Sequential Multiple-Criteria Decision Problems

This paper examines a sequential multiple-criteria decision problem. The problem arises when a decision-maker is unable to consider all possible decision alternatives simultaneously. The decision-maker evaluates only a subset of all decision alternatives, from which he chooses the most preferred solution. Obviously, this solution is not necessarily ‘globally’ best. An interesting question is: how good is the most preferred solution and what are the chances of finding a better solution by considering additional alternatives? A unified approach to solving this problem based on probability theory is presented and illustrated with numerical examples.     

Decision risk analysis for an interval TOPSIS method

TOPSIS is a multi-attribute decision making (MADM) technique for ranking and selection of a number of externally determined alternatives through distance measures. When the collected data for each criterion is interval and the risk attitude for a decision maker is unknown, we present a new TOPSIS method for normalizing the collected data and ranking the alternatives. The results show that the decision maker with different risk attitude ranks the different alternatives.     

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.     

Robust optimization analysis for multiple attribute decision making problems with imprecise information

This paper considers ranking decision alternatives under multiple attributes with imprecise information on both attribute weights and alternative ratings. It is demonstrated that regret results from the decision maker??s inadequate knowledge about the true scenario to occur. Potential optimality analysis is a traditional method to evaluate alternatives with imprecise information. The essence of this approach is to identify any alternative that outperforms the others in its best-case scenario. Our analysis shows that potential optimality analysis is optimistic in nature and may lead to a significant loss if an unfavorable scenario occurs. We suggest a robust optimization analysis approach that ranks alternatives in terms of their worst-case absolute or relative regret. A robust optimal alternative performs reasonably well in all scenarios and is shown to be desirable for a risk-concerned decision maker. Linear programming models are developed to check robust optimality.     

随机偏爱群体决策的随机Borda数法

对于具随机偏爱信息的群体决策问题，本文引入供选方案的随机Borda数和供选方案集上的随机Borda数映射概念．在讨论了随机Borda数映射满足随机偏爱公理的基础上，给出一个对所有供选方案进行群体排序的方法．     

On the maximum number of feasible ranking sequences in multi-criteria decision making problems

In many decision problems the focus is on ranking a set of m alternatives in terms of a number, say n, of decision criteria. Given are the performance values of the alternatives for each one of the criteria and the weights of importance of the criteria. This paper demonstrates that if one assumes that the criteria weights are changeable, then the number of all possible rankings may be significantly less than the upper limit of m!. As a matter of fact, this paper demonstrates that the number of possible rankings is a function of the number of alternatives and the number of criteria. These findings are important from a sensitivity analysis point of view or when a group decision making environment is considered.     

The range of the efficient frontier in multiple objective linear programming

Because a rational decision maker should only select an efficient alternative in multiple criterion decision problems, the efficient frontier defined as the set of all efficient alternatives has become a central solution concept in multiple objective linear programming. Normally this set reduces the set of available alternatives of the underlying problem. There are several methods, mainly based on the simplex method, for computing the efficient frontier. This paper presents a quite different approach which uses a nonlinear parametric program, solved by Wolfe's algorithm, to determine the range of the efficient frontier.     

Stochastic dominance tests for ranking alternatives under ambiguity

Ambiguity in decision making is a condition associated with the existence of one-to-many, or more generally, many-to-many relations between outcomes and probabilities of outcomes. The current use of stochastic dominance tests to rank decision alternatives assumes that outcome probability distributions are unambiguous. This paper first establishes procedures to identify an envelope of the ambiguously-described probability-outcome mapping, then extends stochastic dominance theorems to provide tests that partition alternatives into dominated and non-dominated sets.     

Multi-attribute decision-making in individual and social choice

This paper provides an analysis of individual and social decision criteria for alternatives that are composed of several attributes. We derive additive and multiplicative criteria for individual decision-making with new axioms and apply these criteria to obtain new justifications of known social choice rules with a bargaining interpretation, namely the generalized utilitarian and Nash social choice functions. Unlike most axiomatizations of bargaining solutions, our approach is, to a large extent, based on the multi-attribute structure of the underlying alternatives and the resulting individual decision criteria instead of axioms that impose restrictions on the choice function directly.     

A method of fuzzy preference relation to authorize the worldwide interoperability for microwave access license in Taiwan

This study proposes a preference relation based evaluation framework to help the National Communication Commission (NCC) in Taiwan authorize a worldwide interoperability for microwave access (WiMAX) license under a fuzzy environment where the uncertainty, subjectivity and vagueness are dealt with linguistic variables parameterized by triangular fuzzy numbers. This study applies the fuzzy multi-criteria decision making approach to determine the importance weights of evaluation criteria and consolidate the performance ratings of possible alternatives. Aggregated the evaluators’ opinions toward the criteria and alternatives, the fuzzy preference relation approach is utilized to obtain the non-dominated degree of each alternative for the decision makers to make a final decision. Simultaneously, an empirical case involving sixteen quantitative and fifteen qualitative evaluation criteria, thirteen telecommunication applicants assessed by twelve specialists from various fields of telecommunication industry in Taiwan is solicited to demonstrate the proposed approach.     

Decision making under uncertainty with unknown utility function and rank-ordered probabilities

We consider the ranking of decision alternatives in decision analysis problems under uncertainty, under very weak assumptions about the type of utility function and information about the probabilities of the states of nature. Namely, the following two assumptions are required for the suggested method: the utility function is in the class of increasing continuous functions, and the probabilities of the states of nature are rank-ordered. We develop a simple analytical method for the partial ranking of decision alternatives under the stated assumptions. This method does not require solving optimization programs and is free of the rounding errors.     

MPOC: an agglomerative algorithm for multicriteria partially ordered clustering

In the field of multicriteria decision aid, considerable attention has been paid to supervised classification problems where the purpose is to assign alternatives into predefined ordered classes. In these approaches, often referred to as sorting methods, it is usually assumed that classes are either known a priori or can be identified by the decision maker. On the other hand, when the objective is to identify groups (clusters) of alternatives sharing similar characteristics, the problem is known as a clustering problem, also called an unsupervised learning problem. This paper proposes an agglomerative clustering method based on a crisp outranking relation. The method regroups alternatives into partially ordered classes, based on a quality of partition measure which reflects the percentage of pairs of alternatives that are compatible with a decision-maker’s multicriteria preference model.