Uncertain Preference Assessment using Familiar Alternatives to Decision Maker

In Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a decision problem is structured hierarchically with the criteria and alternatives. The propriety weight vector of the alternatives is obtained as the sums of their local weights considering the importance of the criteria. Once a decision maker finds out his/her preference as the importance of criteria, s/he can evaluate the other sets of alternatives. The preference for criteria is essential and independent of the alternatives. However, the criteria are intangible so that it sometimes difficult for a decision maker to give judgments on them directly. Hence, we propose a method to help a decision maker to find out his/her preference based on his/her experience. It is much easier for him/her to give the judgments on the alternatives that s/he knows well. The preference is denoted as a fuzzy vector of criteria from a possibilistic view. We also propose the model to obtain an interval score vector of new alternatives from the derived preference and their given local scores. Both models of deriving a preference vector and a score vector are based on interval inclusion relation.

[1]  Tomoe Entani,et al.  Uncertainty index based interval assignment by Interval AHP , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[3]  Jian Lin,et al.  Acceptability measurement and priority weight elicitation of triangular fuzzy multiplicative preference relations based on geometric consistency and uncertainty indices , 2017, Inf. Sci..

[4]  Jacinto González-Pachón,et al.  Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review , 2017, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  W. Pedrycz,et al.  A fuzzy extension of Saaty's priority theory , 1983 .

[6]  Masahiro Inuiguchi,et al.  Improving Interval Weight Estimations in Interval AHP by Relaxations , 2017, J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Informatics.

[7]  R. Hämäläinen,et al.  Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons , 1995 .

[8]  Kirti Peniwati,et al.  Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Tomoe Entani,et al.  Pairwise comparison based interval analysis for group decision aiding with multiple criteria , 2015, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[10]  Michele Fedrizzi,et al.  Boundary properties of the inconsistency of pairwise comparisons in group decisions , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  Hideo Tanaka,et al.  Interval Evaluations in the Analytic Hierarchy Process By Possibility Analysis , 2001, Comput. Intell..

[12]  Hideo Tanaka,et al.  Interval priorities in AHP by interval regression analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Tomoe Entani,et al.  Maximum Lower Bound Estimation of Fuzzy Priority Weights from a Crisp Comparison Matrix , 2015, IUKM.

[14]  Raffaello Seri,et al.  Empirical Properties of Group Preference Aggregation Methods Employed in AHP: Theory and Evidence , 2013, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Jaroslav Ramík,et al.  Inconsistency of pair-wise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements based on geometric mean , 2010, Fuzzy Sets Syst..