Static Valuation of Combat Force Potential by the Analytic Hierarchy Process

IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 1991, Pages 237-244

  Lee, Young Woo ^a   Ahn, Byong Hun ^b  

^a Korea Institute for Defense Analysis   (South Korea)

^b Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MILITARY ENGINEERING - MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

COMBAT FORCE POTENTIAL; STATIC VALUATIONS; WEAPON SYSTEMS;

MILITARY EQUIPMENT;

EID: 0026203456     PISSN: 00189391     EISSN: 15580040     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/17.83756     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. J. Aczél and C. Alisina, “On the synthesis of judgments,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 333-339, 1986.
2. I. Aczél and T. L. Saaty, “Procedure for synthesizing ratio judgments,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 27, pp. 93–102, 1983.
3. V. Belton, “A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multiattribute value function,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 26, pp. 7–21, 1986.
4. A. Arbel, T. L. Saaty, and L. G. Vargas, “Nuclear balance in the parity index: The role of intangibles in decisions,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-17, no. 5, pp. 821-828, 1987.
5. R. L. Cook and T. R. Stewart, “A comparison of seven methods for obtaining subjective descriptions of judgmental policy,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol. 13, pp. 31–45, 1975.
6. J. S. Dyer, “Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process,” Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 249-258, Mar. 1990.
7. P. T. Harker, “Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process,” Mathematical Modelling, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 837-848, 1987.
8. P. T. Harker, “Alternative modes of questioning in the analytic hierarchy process,” Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 9, no. 3-5, pp. 353-360, 1987.
9. P. T. Harker and L. G. Vargas, “The theory of ratio scale estimation: Saaty's analytic hierarchy process,” Management Science, Vol. 33, No. 11, pp. 1383-1403, Nov. 1987.
10. P. T. Harker and L. G. Vargas, “Reply to ‘Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process,’ by J. S. Dyer,” Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 269-273, mar. 1990.
11. J. W. Ra and D. F. Kocaoglu, “A method to evaluate expert decisions in hierarchical system,” in Asian-Pacific Operations Research: APORS'88, B.-H. Ahn, Ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1990.
12. K. Y. K. Ng, “On the choice of a military transport aircraft fleet via worth assessment procedure: Case study,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Vol. SMC-10, No. 12, pp. 894-899, Dec. 1980.
13. T. L. Saaty, “The analytic hierarchy process-what it is and how it is used,” Mathematical Modeling, Vol. 9, no. 3–5, pp. 161–176, 1987.
14. T. L. Saaty, “Priority setting in complex problems,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag, Vol. em-30, No. 3, pp. 140–155, Aug. 1983.
15. T. L. Saaty, “An exposition of the AHP in reply to the paper; Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process,” Management Science, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 259–268, Mar. 1990.
16. T. L. Saaty, “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology, vol. 15, pp. 234–281, 1977.
17. T. L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
18. T. L. Saaty and L. G. Vargas, “Hierarchical analysis of behavior in competition: Prediction in chess,” Behavioral Science, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 180-191, 1980.
19. P. J. H. Schoemaker and C. C. Waid, “An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models,” Management Sciences, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 182–196, 1982.
20. J. G. Taylor, “A Lanchester-type aggregated-force model of conventional ground combat,” Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, vol. 30, pp. 237–260, 1983.
21. D. W. Theune, “An alternative method for the valuation of weapon for mathematical battle simulations,” Force Structure, Resource, and Assessment Directorate, Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon, Aug. 1987.