Bayesian revision of the individual pair-wise comparison matrices under consensus in AHP-GDM

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been widely used in group decision making (GDM). There are two traditional aggregation methods for the synthesis of group priorities in AHP-GDM: aggregation of the individual judgments (AIJ) and aggregation of the individual priorities (AIP). However, AIJ and AIP may be less reliable because of inconsistency of the individual pair-wise comparison matrices (PCMs) and deviation among decision makers. Based on multiplicative AHP model with lognormal errors, we propose a Bayesian revision method for improving the individual PCMs under the assumption that the consensus exists among decision makers, which is considered an aid to AIJ and AIP. In order to effectively deal with decision making involving multiple actors when using AHP as the methodological support, we revise the individual PCMs using the Bayesian revision method before using AIJ and AIP for the synthesis of group priorities. The Bayesian revision method not only makes full use of the prior distribution for parameters and sample information while complying with the Pareto principal of social choice theory, but also provides the reliable individual Bayesian PCMs for AIJ and AIP. Finally two numerical examples are examined to illustrate the applications and advantages of the Bayesian revision method.

[1]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Cardinal Consistency of Reciprocal Preference Relations: A Characterization of Multiplicative Transitivity , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[2]  Gang Kou,et al.  Analytic network process in risk assessment and decision analysis , 2014, Comput. Oper. Res..

[3]  Louis C. K. Ma,et al.  A goal programming approach to group decision making based on multiplicative preference relations and fuzzy preference relations , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Some induced ordered weighted averaging operators and their use for solving group decision-making problems based on fuzzy preference relations , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  Enrique Herrera-Viedma,et al.  Consistency-Driven Automatic Methodology to Set Interval Numerical Scales of 2-Tuple Linguistic Term Sets and Its Use in the Linguistic GDM With Preference Relation , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[6]  Christian P. Robert,et al.  Monte Carlo Statistical Methods , 2005, Springer Texts in Statistics.

[7]  Warren R. Hughes,et al.  A statistical framework for strategic decision making with AHP: Probability assessment and Bayesian revision , 2009 .

[8]  W. Wong,et al.  The calculation of posterior distributions by data augmentation , 1987 .

[9]  Gur Dial.  Nonadditive entropies of order 1 and type beta and of order alpha and type beta; cascaded channels and the equivocation inequality , 1982, Inf. Sci..

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

[11]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  A Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[12]  Shui Yu,et al.  Consensus Building in a Local Context for the AHP-GDM With the Individual Numerical Scale and Prioritization Method , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[13]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Analyzing uncertainties in experts' opinions of forest plan performance , 1997 .

[14]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  A note on AHP group consistency for the row geometric mean priorization procedure , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Uncertainty in Expert Predictions of the Ecological Consequences of Forest Plans , 1996 .

[16]  Yi Peng,et al.  FAMCDM: A fusion approach of MCDM methods to rank multiclass classification algorithms , 2011 .

[17]  Gang Kou,et al.  A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Group Decision Making and the AHP , 1989 .

[19]  B. Golany,et al.  A multicriteria evaluation of methods for obtaining weights from ratio-scale matrices , 1993 .

[20]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Group decision making using the analytic hierarchy process , 1993 .

[21]  Dong Cao,et al.  Modifying inconsistent comparison matrix in analytic hierarchy process: A heuristic approach , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[22]  Indrani Basak,et al.  Testing for the rank ordering of the priorities of the alternatives in Saaty's ratio-scale method , 1990 .

[23]  Luis G. Vargas.  Reciprocal matrices with random coefficients , 1982 .

[24]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[25]  Indrani Basak,et al.  The categorical data analysis approach for ratio model of pairwise comparisons , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[26]  Pablo Aragonés Beltrán,et al.  An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects : A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study , 2008 .

[27]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[28]  Christian P. Robert,et al.  Monte Carlo Statistical Methods (Springer Texts in Statistics) , 2005 .

[29]  T. Saaty,et al.  Procedures for Synthesizing Ratio Judgements , 1983 .

[30]  Sajjad Zahir,et al.  Geometry of decision making and the vector space formulation of the analytic hierarchy process , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[31]  Gang Kou,et al.  A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP , 2011, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[32]  Yi Peng,et al.  Evaluation of clustering algorithms for financial risk analysis using MCDM methods , 2014, Inf. Sci..

[33]  P. D. Jong.  A statistical approach to Saaty's scaling method for priorities , 1984 .

[34]  J. Barzilai,et al.  Consistent weights for judgements matrices of the relative importance of alternatives , 1987 .

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

[36]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Integrating multiplicative preference relations in a multipurpose decision-making model based on fuzzy preference relations , 2001, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[37]  José María Moreno-Jiménez,et al.  Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach , 2010, Oper. Res..

[38]  R. Ramanathan,et al.  Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages , 1994 .

[39]  Francisco Chiclana,et al.  Multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic reciprocal preference relations and its application to missing values estimation and consensus building , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[40]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[41]  Bojan Srdjevic,et al.  Synthesis of individual best local priority vectors in AHP-group decision making , 2013, Appl. Soft Comput..

[42]  Ramakrishnan Ramanathan,et al.  A qualitative perspective to deriving weights from pairwise comparison matrices , 2010 .

[43]  Zhibin Wu,et al.  A consistency and consensus based decision support model for group decision making with multiplicative preference relations , 2012, Decis. Support Syst..

[44]  Enrique Herrera-Viedma,et al.  A statistical comparative study of different similarity measures of consensus in group decision making , 2013, Inf. Sci..

[45]  L. A. Goodman,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[46]  X. Zeshui,et al.  A consistency improving method in the analytic hierarchy process , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[47]  Indrani Basak,et al.  Probabilistic judgments specified partially in the analytic hierarchy process , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[49]  Gang Kou,et al.  Enhancing data consistency in decision matrix: Adapting Hadamard model to mitigate judgment contradiction , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

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

[51]  Yin-Feng Xu,et al.  Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method , 2010, Decis. Support Syst..

[52]  Gang Kou,et al.  An improved statistical approach for consistency test in AHP , 2013, Ann. Oper. Res..

[53]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A web based consensus support system for group decision making problems and incomplete preferences , 2010, Inf. Sci..

[54]  J. Barzilai,et al.  Ahp Rank Reversal, Normalization and Aggregation Rules , 1994 .

[55]  Yin-Feng Xu,et al.  A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..