A priority assessment multi-criteria decision model for human spaceflight mission planning at NASA

Analog missions are real-life, Earth-based science missions whose purpose is to help understand the operations, techniques, and technologies required to perform similar tasks during future human spaceflight missions. The goal of performing an analog mission is to prepare crewmembers and support teams for future space missions in a low risk, low-cost environment. Vehicle, habitat, and surface terrain simulators are used to test hardware, operations, and tasks repeatedly for analog missions. This study presents a multi-criteria decision making model that was developed for the Integrated Human Exploration Mission Simulation Facility project at Johnson Space Center to assess the priority of a set of human spaceflight mission simulators. The proposed framework integrates subjective judgments derived from the analytic hierarchy process with entropy data into a preference model to prioritize five mission simulators for the human exploration of Mars.

[1]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Reply to “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” by J. S. Dyer , 1990 .

[2]  Randall L. Schultz,et al.  Marketing decision models , 1983 .

[3]  Saul I. Gass,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process - An Exposition , 2001, Oper. Res..

[4]  J. Edward Russo,et al.  A Pyramid of Decision Approaches , 1993 .

[5]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications - A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[6]  B. Roy Decision-aid and decision-making , 1990 .

[7]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty's analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .

[8]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[9]  T. L. Saaty A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[10]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[11]  Michel Grabisch,et al.  An axiomatic approach to the concept of interaction among players in cooperative games , 1999, Int. J. Game Theory.

[12]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Diagnosis with Dependent Symptoms: Bayes Theorem and the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1998, Oper. Res..

[13]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications , 1992, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[14]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis , 2001 .

[15]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Multiple criteria decision making , 1994 .

[16]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[17]  Constantin Zopounidis,et al.  Multicriteria Decision Aid Classification Methods , 2002 .

[18]  John B. Kidd,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives—Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1977 .

[19]  J. Dyer Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process , 1990 .

[20]  James S. Dyer,et al.  A clarification of “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” , 1990 .

[21]  T. Saaty Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process , 1986 .

[22]  Evangelos Triantaphyllou,et al.  Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study , 2000 .

[23]  T. Saaty An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper “remarks on the analytic hierarchy process” , 1990 .

[24]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Decision Making, Scaling, and Number Crunching , 1989 .

[25]  Philippe Vincke,et al.  Multicriteria Decision-aid , 1993 .

[26]  M. Bohanec,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2004 .

[27]  Philippe Vincke,et al.  Description and analysis of some representative interactive multicriteria procedures , 1989 .