Using the three-way matrix for AHP-group decision-making
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23755/rm.v53i0.1643Abstract
The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the most well-known and used multi-criteria methods in the field of decision problems. In many situations, the decision is not up to a single person but involves multiple decision-makers with different preferences with respect to the various elements of the problem. Applying a traditional AHP with certain preference aggregation mechanisms, the procedure is very burdened by the many pairwise comparison matrices due to the number of decision-makers. The aim of this paper is to summarize the problem of representing the different preferences between the criteria and the alternatives, for the various decision makers using the three-way data matrix. This matrix allows us to examine, in a contemporary and global manner, the preferences of several decision-makers in the decision-making context. Three-way principal component models can be used to treat the three-way matrix, particularly for the derivation of AHP priorities.References
Saaty, T. L. (1986). Axiomatic foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 32(7), 841-855.
Saaty T. L. (1985) Axiomatization of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In: Haimes Y.Y., Chankong V. (eds) Decision Making with Multiple Objectives. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, 242. Springer.
Saaty, T. L. (1987). The Analytic Hierarchy Process-what it is and how it is used. Mat/d Modelling, 9(3-5), 161-176.
Saaty, T. L. (1994a). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L. (1994b). Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 74(3), 426-447.
Saaty, T. L. (2005). Making and validating complex decisions with the ahp/anp. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 14 (1), 1-36.
Saaty, T. L. (2008a). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Services Sciences, 1(1).
Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to make a decision: the Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26.
Ishizaka, A. (2004). Development of an Intelligent Tutoring System for AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). WWZ Forschungsbericht(10/04).
Lootsma, F. A. (1996). A model for the relative importance of the criteria in the multiplicative AHP and SMART. European Journal of Operational Research, 94(3).
Cavallo, B. (2014). A further discussion of ‘‘A Semiring-based study of judgment matrices: properties and models’’. Information Sciences, 287, 61-67.
Saaty, T. L. (1994a). Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications.
Alonso, J. A., & Lamata, T. M. (2006). Consistency in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: a new approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(4), 445-459.
Aguarón, J., & Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2003). The geometric consistency index: Approximated thresholds. European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 137-145.
Lane, E. F., & Verdini, W. A. (1989). A Consistency Test for AHP Decision Makers. Decision Sciences, 20(3), 575-590.
Forman, E. H. (1990). Random indices for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 153-155.
Mu, E., & Pereyra Rojas, M. (2017). Practical Decision Making. An Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Using Super Decisions V2. Springer.
Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336-14345.
Forman, E. H., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165-169.
Ishizaka, A., & Nemery, P. (2013). Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Methods and Software. Wiley.
Mikhailov, L. (2004). Group prioritization in the AHP by fuzzy preference programming method. Computers & Operations Research, 31, 293-301.
Altuzarra, A. M.-J. (2007). A Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 182, 367-382.
Coppi, R., & Bolasco, S. (1990). Multiway data analysis. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 9(2).
Bro, R. (1998). Multi-way Analysis in the Food Industry. Models, Algorithms, and Applications. Ph. D. thesis. University of Amsterdam.
Harshman, R. A., & Lundy, M. E. (1984). The PARAFAC model for three-way factor analysis and multidimensional scaling. In H. Law, C. Snyder, J. Hattie, & R. McDonald, Research methods for multi-mode data analysis. New York: Praeger.
L'Hermier Des Plantes, H. (1976). Structuration des tableaux a trois indices de la statistique. Thèse de troisième cycle. Université Montpellier II.
Escoufier, Y. (1973). Le traitement des Variables Vectorielles. Biometrics, 29(4), 751-760.
Pieri, L., & Vichi, M. (1991). Le matrici a tre indici e le loro sintesi rappresentative. Statistica Applicata, 3(2), 145-173.
Harshman, R. A. (1970). Foundations of the PARAFAC procedure: models and conditions for an "explanatory" multi-mode factor analysis. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 16, 1-84.
Carroll, D. J., & Chang, J. J. (1970). Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an n-way generalization of "Eckart-Young" decomposition. Psychometrika, 35(3), 283-319.
Tucker, L. R. (1966). Some mathematical notes on three-mode factor analysis. Psychometrika, 31, 279-311.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The journal is committed to real and immediate open access for academic work. All of the journal articles are free to access immediately from the date of publication. There are no charge for readers to download articles and reviews for their own scholarly use. Benefits of open access for authors, include:
- Free access for all users worldwide
- Increased visibility and readership
- Rapid publication
- No spatial constraints
- Authors can share their research papers on their personal web-pages (i.e. ResearchGate, etc.)
Ratio Mathematica publishes open access articles under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) License. The Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY) allows users to copy, distribute and transmit an article, adapt the article and make commercial use of the article. The CC BY license permits commercial and non-commercial re-use of an open access article, as long as the author is properly attributed. Copyright on any research article published by Ratio Mathematica is retained by the author(s). Authors grant Ratio Mathematica a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
For further information visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. The following logo will appear in any paper that will be published from the volume number 31/2016 onwards.
