Uncertainty index based interval assignment by Interval AHP

In a multi-attribute decision making problem, indigenous values are assigned to attributes based on a decision maker’s subjective judgments. The given judgments are often uncertain, because of the uncertainty of situations and intuitiveness of human judgments. In order to reflect the uncertainty in the assigned values, they are denoted as intervals whose widths represent the possibilities of attributes. Since it is difficult for a decision maker to assign values directly to attributes in case of more than two attributes, he/she gives a pairwise comparison matrix by comparing two attributes at one occasion. The given matrix contains two kinds of uncertainty, one is inconsistency among comparisons and the other is incompleteness of comparisons. This paper proposes the models to obtain intervals of attributes from the given uncertain pairwise comparison matrix. At first, the uncertainty indexes of a set of intervals are defined from the viewpoints of entropy in probability, sum or maximum of widths, or ignorance. Then, considering that too uncertain information is not useful, the intervals of attributes are obtained by minimizing their uncertainty indexes.     

An intelligent decomposition of pairwise comparison matrices for large-scale decisions

A Pairwise Comparison Matrix (PCM) has been used to compute for relative priorities of elements and are integral components in widely applied decision making tools: the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its generalized form, the Analytic Network Process (ANP). However, PCMs suffer from several issues limiting their applications to large-scale decision problems. These limitations can be attributed to the curse of dimensionality, that is, a large number of pairwise comparisons need to be elicited from a decision maker. This issue results to inconsistent preferences due to the limited cognitive powers of decision makers. To address these limitations, this research proposes a PCM decomposition methodology that reduces the elicited pairwise comparisons. A binary integer program is proposed to intelligently decompose a PCM into several smaller subsets using interdependence scores among elements. Since the subsets are disjoint, the most independent pivot element is identified to connect all subsets to derive the global weights of the elements from the original PCM. As a result, the number of pairwise comparison is reduced and consistency is of the comparisons is improved. The proposed decomposition methodology is applied to both AHP and ANP to demonstrate its advantages.     

Multi-criteria decision making with fuzzy linguistic preference relations

Although the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the extent analysis method (EAM) of fuzzy AHP are extensively adopted in diverse fields, inconsistency increases as hierarchies of criteria or alternatives increase because AHP and EAM require rather complicated pairwise comparisons amongst elements (attributes or alternatives). Additionally, decision makers normally find that assigning linguistic variables to judgments is simpler and more intuitive than to fixed value judgments. Hence, Wang and Chen proposed fuzzy linguistic preference relations (Fuzzy LinPreRa) to address the above problem. This study adopts Fuzzy LinPreRa to re-examine three numerical examples. The re-examination is intended to compare our results with those obtained in earlier works and to demonstrate the advantages of Fuzzy LinPreRa. This study demonstrates that, in addition to reducing the number of pairwise comparisons, Fuzzy LinPreRa also increases decision making efficiency and accuracy.     

Theory of convex cones in multicriteria decision making

We develop the theory of convex polyhedral cones in the objective-function space of a multicriteria decision problem. The convex cones are obtained from the decision-maker's pairwise judgments of decision alternatives and are applicable to any quasiconcave utility function. Therefore, the cones can be used in any progressively articulated solution procedure that employs pairwise comparisons. The cones represent convex sets of solutions that are inferior to known solutions to a multicriteria problem. Therefore, these convex sets can be eliminated from consideration while solving the problem. We develop the underlying theory and a framework for representing knowledge about the decision-maker's preference structure using convex cones. This framework can be adopted in the interactive solution of any multicriteria problem after taking into account the characteristics of the problem and the solution procedure. Our computational experience with different multicriteria problems shows that this approach is both viable and efficient in solving practical problems of moderate size.     

A fuzzy ranking method with range reduction techniques

For ranking alternatives based on pairwise comparisons, current analytic hierarchy process (AHP) methods are difficult to use to generate useful information to assist decision makers in specifying their preferences. This study proposes a novel method incorporating fuzzy preferences and range reduction techniques. Modified from the concept of data envelopment analysis (DEA), the proposed approach is not only capable of treating incomplete preference matrices but also provides reasonable ranges to help decision makers to rank decision alternatives confidently.     

A new design of the elimination and choice translating reality method for multi-criteria group decision-making in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment

The purpose of this paper is to design a new extension of the ELECTRE, known as the elimination and choice translating reality method, for multi-criteria group decision-making problems based on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. This method is widely utilized when a set of alternatives should be identified and evaluated with respect to a set of conflicting criteria by reflecting decision makers’ (DMs’) preferences. However, handling the exact data and numerical measure is difficult to be precisely focused because the DMs’ judgments are often vague in real-life decision problems and applications. A more realistic and practical approach can be to use linguistic variables expressed in intuitionistic fuzzy numbers instead of numerical data to model DMs’ judgments and to describe the inputs in the ELECTRE method. The proposed intuitionsitic fuzzy ELECTRE utilizes the truth-membership function and non-truth-membership function to indicate the degrees of satisfiability and non-satisfiability of each alternative with respect to each criterion and the relative importance of each criterion, respectively. Then, a new discordance intuitionistic index is introduced, which is extended from the concept of the fuzzy distance measure. Outranking relations are defined by pairwise comparisons and a decision graph is depicted to determine which alternative is preferable, incomparable or indifferent in the intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Finally, a comprehensive sensitivity analysis is employed to further study regarding the impact of threshold values on the final evaluation, and a comparative analysis is demonstrated with an application example in flexible manufacturing systems between the proposed ELECTRE method and the existing intuitionistic fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (IF-TOPSIS) method.     

Ordinal judgments in multiattribute decision analysis

The article discusses the contradiction between the ambiguity of human judgment in a multicriterion environment and the exactness of the assessments required in the majority of the decision-making methods. Preferential information from the decision makers in the ordinal form (e.g., “more preferable”, “less preferable”, etc.) is argued to be more stable and more reliable than cardinal input. Ways of obtaining and using ordinal judgments for rank ordering of multiattribute alternatives are discussed. The effectiveness of the step-wise procedure of using ordinal tradeoffs for comparison of alternatives is evaluated. We introduce the notion of ordinal tradeoffs, presentation of ordinal tradeoffs as a flexible three-stage process, a paired joint ordinal scale (PJOS), and evaluation of the effectiveness of the three-stage process. Simulation results examine the sensitivity of the number of pairwise comparisons required for given numbers of criteria and categories within criteria, as well as the number of alternatives analyzed. This simulation shows that ordinal pairwise comparisons provide sufficient power to discriminate between 75% and 80% of the alternatives compared. While the proportional number of pairwise comparisons relative to the maximum possible decreases with the number of criteria and categories, the method is relatively insensitive to the number of alternatives considered.     

Inconsistency indices for pairwise comparison matrices: a numerical study

Evaluating the level of inconsistency of pairwise comparisons is often a crucial step in multi criteria decision analysis. Several inconsistency indices have been proposed in the literature to estimate the deviation of expert’s judgments from a situation of full consistency. This paper surveys and analyzes ten indices from the numerical point of view. Specifically, we investigate degrees of agreement between them to check how similar they are. Results show a wide range of behaviors, ranging from very strong to very weak degrees of agreement.     

The analytic hierarchy process with stochastic judgements

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is a widely-used method for multicriteria decision support based on the hierarchical decomposition of objectives, evaluation of preferences through pairwise comparisons, and a subsequent aggregation into global evaluations. The current paper integrates the AHP with stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA), an inverse-preference method, to allow the pairwise comparisons to be uncertain. A simulation experiment is used to assess how the consistency of judgements and the ability of the SMAA-AHP model to discern the best alternative deteriorates as uncertainty increases. Across a range of simulated problems results indicate that, according to conventional benchmarks, judgements are likely to remain consistent unless uncertainty is severe, but that the presence of uncertainty in almost any degree is sufficient to make the choice of best alternative unclear.     

Generalized transitivity and preferences modelling: The concept of Hyper-Order

A relational system of preferences (Hyper-Order) based on a generalization of the property of transitivity is proposed avoiding some shortcomings of previous contributions to model the prefenreces of decision makers. The purpose of this contribution is enlarging the spectrum of existing theoretical frameworks to support decision-aid methodes based on pairwise comparisons. An application to a real case-study and a computational implementation are also presented herein.     

Incorporating additional meta-objectives into the extended lexicographic goal programming framework

This paper introduces two new meta-objectives into the extended goal programming framework. The first meta-objective is the number of unmet goals and the second is a measure of closeness to the pairwise comparisons given by the decision maker. These complement the original two meta-objectives of the weighted sum of deviations and the maximal weighted deviation to provide a flexible four meta-objective framework. Lexicographic and non-lexicographic representations of the framework are developed. An example relating to transportation is solved in both the lexicographic and non-lexicographic forms. Weight sensitivity analysis is applied to the meta-weight parameters for the non-lexicographic case in order to find a range of available distinct solutions.     

A Network Optimization Model for Budget Allocation in a Multi-Campus University

A network flow model is used for budget allocation in a multi-campus institution over several years. The network had a hierarchical structure with three hierarchies. The network's lower bounds represent the minimal requirements for each component. The upper bounds represent the predicted future requirement. They are predicted via a cost simulation model where several volume indices, policy variables and some environmental factors are used. Thus the overall planning process combines simulation with optimization.The model maximizes the additive utility function of the institution, expressed as a weighted summation over the preferences of the three hierarchies. The preferences are evaluated by using a multi-goal approach, utilizing pairwise comparisons and the eigenvalue prioritization technique developed by T. Saaty.     

Design and analysis of predictive sorting algorithms

The focus of this research is the class of sequential algorithms, called predictive sorting algorithms, for sorting a given set ofn elements using pairwise comparisons. The order in which these pairwise comparisons are made is defined by a fixed sequence of all unordered pairs of distinct integers {1, 2, ...,n} called a sort sequence. A predictive sorting algorithm associated with a sort sequence specifies pairwise comparisons of elements in the input set in the order defined by the sort sequence, except that the comparisons whose outcomes can be inferred from the preceding pairs of comparisons are not performed. In this paper predictive sorting algorithms are obtained, based on known sorting algorithms, and are shown to be required on the averageO(n logn) comparisons.     

When conflict induces the expression of incomplete preferences

Multicriteria conflict arises in pairwise comparisons, where each alternative outperforms the other one on some criterion, which imposes a trade-off. Comparing two alternatives can be difficult if their respective advantages are of high magnitude (the attribute spread is large). In this paper, we investigate to which extent conflict in a comparison situation can lead decision makers to express incomplete preferences, that is, to refuse to compare the two alternatives, or to be unable to compare them with confidence. We report on an experiment in which subjects expressed preferences on pairs of alternatives involving varying conflicts. Results show that depending on whether the participants are allowed to express incomplete preferences or not, attribute spread has a different effect: a large attribute spread increases the frequency of incomparability statements, when available, while it increases the use of indifference statements when only indifference and preference answers are permitted. These results lead us to derive some implications for preference elicitation methods involving comparison tasks.     

Interactive Utility Assessment in Multicriteria Decision Analysis Using Implicit Trade-off Information

This paper introduces a methodology for the assessment of a decision-maker's utility function, based on interactions requiring relatively easy responses of the implicit trade-off type, i.e. similar to responses required in STEM or goal programming methods. The estimation of the value-function model to represent preferences is useful in ranking or pruning elements of the decision space. Inputs required from the decision-maker are, however, less demanding than the pairwise comparisons (or similar preference statements) typically required by value-function models. The methodology thus appears to be appropriate for relatively large numbers of criteria. An algorithm for implementing the proposed methodology for finite action spaces is developed and applied to examples involving up to 15 criteria.     

Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker

Pairwise comparison is a popular assessment method either for deriving criteria-weights or for evaluating alternatives according to a given criterion. In real-world applications consistency of the comparisons rarely happens: intransitivity can occur. The aim of the paper is to discuss the relationship between the consistency of the decision maker—described with the error-free property—and the consistency of the pairwise comparison matrix (PCM). The concept of error-free matrix is used to demonstrate that consistency of the PCM is not a sufficient condition of the error-free property of the decision maker. Informed and uninformed decision makers are defined. In the first stage of an assessment method a consistent or near-consistent matrix should be achieved: detecting, measuring and improving consistency are part of any procedure with both types of decision makers. In the second stage additional information are needed to reveal the decision maker’s real preferences. Interactive questioning procedures are recommended to reach that goal.     

A new data envelopment analysis method for priority determination and group decision making in the analytic hierarchy process

The DEAHP method for weight deviation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been found flawed and sometimes produces counterintuitive priority vectors for inconsistent pairwise comparison matrices, which makes its application very restrictive. This paper proposes a new data envelopment analysis (DEA) method for priority determination in the AHP and extends it to the group AHP situation. In this new DEA methodology, two specially constructed DEA models that differ from the DEAHP model are used to derive the best local priorities from a pairwise comparison matrix or a group of pairwise comparison matrices no matter whether they are perfectly consistent or inconsistent. The new DEA method produces true weights for perfectly consistent pairwise comparison matrices and the best local priorities that are logical and consistent with decision makers (DMs)’ subjective judgments for inconsistent pairwise comparison matrices. In hierarchical structures, the new DEA method utilizes the simple additive weighting (SAW) method for aggregation of the best local priorities without the need of normalization. Numerical examples are examined throughout the paper to show the advantages of the new DEA methodology and its potential applications in both the AHP and group decision making.     

Pairwise-comparison methods in multiple objective programming,with applications in a long-term energy-planning model

We propose to use pairwise comparisons within the framework of ideal-point or reference-point methods for multi-objective programming. The decision makers are requested to estimate the ratios which are acceptable for deviations from the ideal vector. Thereafter, we seek the nearest feasible solution using the Tchebycheff norm. In this paper we sketch the pairwise-comparison methods, some aspects of magnitude scaling, and the ideal-point methods. We show the results of our numerical experiments in long-term energy planning with nine objective functions. Finally, we present a preliminary evaluation of the combined method on the basis of its possible contribution to interactive decision analysis.     

Investing in the stock market: Statistical pooling of individual preference judgments

Literature concerning the quality of individual and face-to-face group judgments has generally concluded that both groups and statistically pooled individuals outperform randomly chosen or average individuals. This paper extends previous research by comparing statistically pooled individual judgments of both individuals and face-to-face groups in a stock selection task. In general, decisions that would have resulted from statistically pooled judgments were better (as assessed by future stock value) than those that would have resulted from individual or face-to-face group judgments. In choosing among pooling methods, majority rule is often thought to be a very compelling criterion. However, majority rule can produce intransitive group preferences. Methods that use some procedure to resolve the intransitivities of majority rule did not perform well relative to other non-majority rule based methods. Another class of pooling methods, termed equity methods, used in conjunction with ordinal judgments, are recommended based on simplicity, performance, and fairness criteria. The results are discussed in terms of the nature of the task.     

A distributed social choice protocol for combinatorial domains

In this paper, we study the problem of collective decision-making over combinatorial domains, where the set of possible alternatives is a Cartesian product of (finite) domain values for each of a given set of variables, and these variables are not preferentially independent. Due to the large alternative space, most common rules for social choice cannot be directly applied to compute a winner. In this paper, we introduce a distributed protocol for collective decision-making in combinatorial domains, which enjoys the following desirable properties: (i) the final decision chosen is guaranteed to be a Smith member; (ii) it enables distributed decision-making and works under incomplete information settings, i.e., the agents are not required to reveal their preferences explicitly; (iii) it significantly reduces the amount of dominance testings (individual outcome comparisons) that each agent needs to conduct, as well as the number of pairwise comparisons; (iv) it is sufficiently general and does not restrict the choice of preference representation languages.