The geometric consistency index: Approximated thresholds

Abstract Crawford and Williams [Journal of Mathematical Psychology 29 (1985) 387] suggested for the Row Geometric Mean Method (RGMM), one of the most extended AHP’s priorization procedure, a measure of the inconsistency based on stochastic properties of a subjacent model. In this paper, we formalize this inconsistency measure, hereafter called the Geometric Consistency Index (GCI), and provide the thresholds associated with it. These thresholds allow us an interpretation of the inconsistency tolerance level analogous to that proposed by Saaty [Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York, 1980] for the Consistency Ratio (CR) used with the Right Eigenvector Method in Conventional-AHP.

[1]  Patrick T. Harker,et al.  The Analytic hierarchy process : applications and studies , 1989 .

[2]  Eiji Takeda.  A note on consistent adjustments of pairwise comparison judgments , 1993 .

[3]  T. Saaty.  Eigenvector and logarithmic least squares , 1990 .

[4]  F. Lootsma.  SCALE SENSITIVITY IN THE MULTIPLICATIVE AHP AND SMART , 1993 .

[5]  José María Moreno Jiménez,et al.  Problemas de gran tamaño en el proceso analítico jerárquico , 1997 .

[6]  Reuven R. Levary,et al.  An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment , 1999 .

[7]  Luis G. Vargas.  Reply to Schenkerman's avoiding rank reversal in AHP decision support models , 1994 .

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

[9]  Po-Lung Yu,et al.  Assessing priority weights from subsets of pairwise comparisons in multiple criteria optimization problems , 1995 .

[10]  Jonathan Barzilai,et al.  POWER RELATIONS AND GROUP AGGREGATION IN THE MULTIPLICATIVE AHP AND SMART , 1997 .

[11]  R. E. Jensen.  An alternative scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures , 1984 .

[12]  R. C. Van den Honert,et al.  Stochastic group preference modelling in the multiplicative AHP: A model of group consensus , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Cathal M. Brugha,et al.  Relative measurement and the power function , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[14]  G. Gescheider.  Psychophysics : method, theory, and application , 1985 .

[15]  Luis G. Vargas.  Comments on Barzilai and Lootsma: Why the Multiplicative AHP Is Invalid: A Practical Counterexample , 1997 .

[16]  Bodo Glaser.  Fundamentals of Decision Making , 2002 .

[17]  P. Harker.  Alternative modes of questioning in the analytic hierarchy process , 1987 .

[18]  H. Monsuur.  An intrinsic consistency threshold for reciprocal matrices , 1997 .

[19]  R. Ramanathan.  Stochastic decision making using multiplicative AHP , 1997 .

[20]  Ram Narasimhan,et al.  A geometric averaging procedure for constructing supertransitive approximation to binary comparison matrices , 1982 .

[21]  David V. Budescu,et al.  Scaling binary comparison matrices: A comment on narasimhan's proposal and other methods , 1984 .

[22]  G. Crawford,et al.  A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices , 1985 .

[23]  J. Barzilai.  Deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices , 1997 .

[24]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  Local stability intervals in the analytic hierarchy process , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  Reciprocal distributions in the analytic hierarchy process , 2000, Eur. J. Oper. Res..