Making and validating complex decisions with the AHP/ANP

Several examples that serve to validate the AHP/ANP with matrices hierarchies and networks are given in this paper. They are then followed by a discussion of the real numbers and how they are generated without the need for an absolute zero, and how they define an absolute scale of measurement that also does not need an absolute zero. In the AHP/ANP the measurement of an alternative depends on what other alternatives it is compared with. The result is that rank can change if alternatives are added or deleted, something that does not occur in one-at-a-time rating of the alternatives by comparing them with an ideal. An example is provided to show that this is natural and need not involve new criteria or change in judgments. A brief discussion of Utility Theory, the other multi-criteria theory, which uses interval scales to measure intangibles and some of its problems and paradoxes, is given. The references at the end include most of the papers that are adverse to the AHP with brief comments about several of them given in the paper.

[1]  J. Barzilai.  Consistency Measures for Pairwise Comparison Matrices , 1998 .

[2]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  The decision by the US congress on China's trade status: a multicriteria analysis , 2001 .

[3]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  The Logic of Priorities , 1982 .

[4]  T. Saaty,et al.  Projecting average family size in rural India by the analytic hierarchy process. , 1983, The Journal of mathematical sociology.

[5]  P. Leskinen.  Measurement scales and scale independence in the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 2000 .

[6]  Martin Weber,et al.  Remarks on the paper ‘On the Measurement of Preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy Process’ by A. A. Salo and R. P. Hämäläinen , 1997 .

[7]  William C. Wedley,et al.  Modelling risk and uncertainty with the analytic hierarchy process , 2002 .

[8]  T. Stewart.  A CRITICAL SURVEY ON THE STATUS OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING THEORY AND PRACTICE , 1992 .

[9]  R. D. Holder,et al.  Some Comments on the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[10]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process: wash criteria should not be ignored , 2006 .

[11]  R. Hämäläinen,et al.  On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process , 1997 .

[12]  Rakesh Kumar Sarin,et al.  Strength of Preference and Risky Choice , 1982, Oper. Res..

[13]  Richard de Neufville,et al.  Empirical Demonstration that Expected Utility Decision Analysis is Not Operational , 1983 .

[14]  E. Choo,et al.  A UNIFIED APPROACH TO AHP WITH LINKING PINS , 1993 .

[15]  M. Beynon.  An investigation of the role of scale values in the DS/AHP method of multi-criteria decision making , 2002 .

[16]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Estimating technological coefficients by the analytic hierarchy process , 1979 .

[17]  Antonie Stam,et al.  On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  James Surowiecki.  The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations Doubleday Books. , 2004 .

[19]  S R Watson,et al.  COMMENTS ON: ASSESSING ATTRIBUTE WEIGHTS BY RATIO , 1983 .

[20]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  That is not the analytic hierarchy process: what the AHP is and what it is not , 1997 .

[21]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Prediction, Projection And Forecasting , 1990 .

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

[23]  Ricardo D. Kamenetzky.  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS AND THE ADDITIVE VALUE FUNCTION , 1982 .

[24]  Howard Raiffa,et al.  Games And Decisions , 1958 .

[25]  B. Russell,et al.  Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy , 1920, The Mathematical Gazette.

[26]  V. Belton,et al.  The legitimacy of rank reversal—A comment , 1985 .

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

[28]  Tobias Dantzig,et al.  Number: the Language of Science , 1931 .

[29]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The Number Sense: How the Mind Creates Mathematics. , 1998 .

[30]  A. A. J. Marley,et al.  Random utility models with equality: An apparent, but not actual, generalization of random utility models , 1974 .

[31]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  A Measure of World Influence , 1976 .

[32]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  The legitimacy of rank reversal , 1984 .

[33]  Stan Schenkerman,et al.  Inducement of Nonexistent Order by the Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1997 .

[34]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Experiments on rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement , 1993 .

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

[36]  Valerie Belton,et al.  On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies , 1983 .

[37]  William J. Hurley,et al.  The analytic hierarchy process: can wash criteria be ignored? , 2002, Comput. Oper. Res..

[38]  M. Machina.  Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved , 1987 .

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

[40]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Forecasting foreign exchange rates: an expert judgment approach , 1987 .

[41]  Jonathan Barzilai.  On the decomposition of value functions , 1998, Oper. Res. Lett..

[42]  Stan Schenkerman.  Avoiding rank reversal in AHP decision-support models , 1994 .