Pairwise comparison matrices and the error-free property of the decision maker

Central European Journal of Operations Research

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 239-249

  Temesi, József ^a  

^a Operációkutatás és Aktuáriustudományok Tanszék docense   (Hungary)

Author keywords

Consistency; Decision making; Error free matrices; Pairwise comparisons

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955054621     PISSN: 1435246X     EISSN: 16139178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10100-010-0145-8     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Aguarón J, Moreno-Jiménez JM (2003) The geometric consistency index: approximated thresholds. Eur J Oper Res 147: 137-145.
2. Bana e Costa CA, Vansnick J-C (2008) A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP. Eur J Oper Res 187: 1422-1428.
3. Bozóki S, Rapcsák T (2008) On Saaty's and Koczkodaj's inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices. J Glob Optim 42(2): 157-175.
4. Bozóki S, Fülöp J, Poesz A (2010) On pairwise comparison matrices that can be made consistent by the modification of a few elements. Cent Eur J Oper Res. doi: 10. 1007/s10100-010-0136-9.
5. Choo EU, Wedley WC (2004) A common framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices. Comput Oper Res 31: 893-908.
6. Cogger KO, Yu PL (1985) "Eigenweight vectors and least distance approximation for revealed preference in pairwise weight ratios". J Optim Theor Appl 46: 483-491.
7. Crawford G, Williams C (1985) A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices. J Math Psychol 29: 387-405.
8. Fichtner J (1986) On deriving priority vectors from matrices of pairwise comparisons. Socioecon Plann Sci 20: 341-345.
9. Gass SI, Rapcsák T (2004) "Singular value decomposition in AHP". Eur J Oper Res 154: 573-584.
10. Golany B, Kress M (1993) "A multicriteria evaluation of methods for obtaining weights from ratio-scale matrices". Eur J Oper Res 69: 210-220.
11. Koczkodaj WW (1993) A new definition of consistency of pairwise comparisons. Math Comput Model 18(7): 79-84.
12. Lin C-C (2007) A revised framework for deriving preference values from pairwise comparison matrices. Eur J Oper Res 176: 1145-1150.
13. Peláez JI, Lamata MT (2003) A new measure of consistency for positive reciprocal matrices. Comput Math Appl 46: 1839-1845.
14. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarch process. McGraw Hill, New York.
15. Saaty TL (2005) The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In: Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, New York, pp 345-407.
16. Shirland LE, Jesse RR, Thompson RL, Iacavou CL (2003) Determining attribute weights using mathematical programming. Omega 31: 423-437.
17. Srdjevic B (2005) Combining different prioritization methods in the analytic hierarchy process synthesis. Comput Oper Res 32: 1897-1919.
18. Stein WE, Mizzi PJ (2007) The harmonic consistency index for the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 177: 488-497.
19. Temesi J (2006) Consistency of the decision maker in pairwise comparisons. Int J Manage Decis Mak 7: 267-274.
20. Tsoukias A (2008) From decision theory to decision aiding methodology. Eur J Oper Res 187: 138-161.
21. Wedley WC (2008) From no thing to some things-deriving ratio preferences. 19th International Conference on MCDM, Auckland, pp 32-33.
22. Xu Z, Wei C (1999) A consistency improving method in the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 116: 443-449.