Heuristic rating estimation approach to the pairwise comparisons method

Fundamenta Informaticae

Volumn 133, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 367-386

  Kułakowski, Konrad ^a  

^a AGH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ITERATIVE METHODS;

PAIR-WISE COMPARISON; RATING ESTIMATION; RATIO ESTIMATIONS; UNKNOWN VALUES; WEIGHT VECTOR;

HEURISTIC METHODS;

EID: 84908682964     PISSN: 01692968     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/FI-2014-1081     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Bagnara, R.: A Unified Proof For The Convergence Of Jacobi And Gauss-Seidel Methods, SIAM Review, 37, 1995.
2. Barzilai, J., Golany, B.: AHP rank reversal, normalization and aggregation rules, INFOR-Information Systems and Operational Research, 32(2), 1994, 57-64.
3. Bodzoń-Kułakowska, A., Kułakowski, K., Drabik, A., Moszczynski, A., Silberring, J., Suder, P.: Morphinome-A meta-Analysis applied to proteomics studies in morphine dependence., Proteomics, 11(1), January 2011, 5-21.
4. Bozóki, S.: Solution of the least squares method problem of pairwise comparison matrices, Central European Journal of Operations Research, 16(4), 2008, 345-358.
5. Bozóki, S., Fülöp, J., Rónyai, L.: On optimal completion of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(1-2), 2010, 318-333, ISSN 0895-7177.
6. Bozóki, S., Rapcsak, T.: On Saaty's and Koczkodaj's inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices, Journal of Global Optimization, 42(2), 2008, 157-175.
7. Brunelli, M., Canal, L., Fedrizzi, M.: Inconsistency indices for pairwise comparison matrices: a numerical study, Annals of Operations Research, February 2013.
8. Colomer, J. M.: Ramon Llull: from 'Ars electionis' to social choice theory, Social Choice and Welfare, 40(2), October 2011, 317-328.
9. Bana e Costa, C. A., Vansnick, J.: A critical analysis of the eigenvalue method used to derive priorities in AHP, European Journal of Operational Research, 187(3), June 2008, 1422-1428.
10. Crawford, G. B.: The geometric mean procedure for estimating the scale of a judgement matrix, Mathematical Modelling, 9(3-5), 1987, 327-334, ISSN 0270-0255.
11. Dyer, J. S.: Remarks on the analytic hierarchy process, Management Science, 36(3), 1990, 249-258.
12. Fechner, G. T.: Elements of psychophysics, vol. 1, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1966.
13. Fedrizzi, M., Brunelli, M.: On the priority vector associated with a reciprocal relation and a pairwise comparison matrix, Journal of Soft Computing, 14(6), January 2010, 639-645, ISSN 1432-7643.
14. Fedrizzi, M., Giove, S.: Incomplete pairwise comparison and consistency optimization, European Journal of Operational Research, 183(1), 2007, 303-313.
15. Greco, S., Matarazzo, B., Słowiński, R.: Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach on Pairwise Comparison Tables to Decision Involving Multiple Decision Makers, in: Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology (J. Yao, S. Ramanna, G. Wang, Z. Suraj, Eds.), vol. 6954 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, ISBN 978-3-642-24424-7, 126-135.
16. Ho, W.: Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications-A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research, 186(1), March 2008, 18-18.
17. Ishizaka, A., Labib, A.: Analytic hierarchy process and expert choice: Benefits and limitations, OR Insight, 22(4), 2009, 201-220.
18. Ishizaka, A., Labib, A.: Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), October 2011, 14336-14345.
19. Ishizaka, A., Lusti, M.: How to derive priorities in AHP: a comparative study, Central European Journal of Operations Research, 14(4), December 2006, 387-400.
20. Janicki, R., Zhai, Y.: On a pairwise comparison-based consistent non-numerical ranking, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 20(4), 2012, 667-676.
21. Koczkodaj, W. W.: A new definition of consistency of pairwise comparisons, Math. Comput. Model., 18(7), October 1993, 79-84, ISSN 0895-7177.
22. Koczkodaj, W. W., Herman, M. W., Orlowski, M.: Managing Null Entries in Pairwise Comparisons, Knowledge and Information Systems, 1(1), 1999, 119-125.
23. Koczkodaj, W. W., Orłowski, M.: Computing a consistent approximation to a generalized pairwise comparisons matrix, Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 37(3), 1999, 79-85.
24. Koczkodaj, W. W., Szarek, S. J.: On distance-based inconsistency reduction algorithms for pairwise comparisons, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 18(6), October 2010, 859-869.
25. Kułakowski, K.: A heuristic rating estimation algorithm for the pairwise comparisons method, Central European Journal of Operations Research, 2013, 1-17, ISSN 1435-246X.
26. Liberatore, M. J., Nydick, R. L.: The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review, European Journal of Operational Research, 189(1), August 2008, 14-14.
27. Mikhailov, L.: Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 134(3), March 2003, 365-385.
28. Ministry of Science and Higher Education: Regulation on principles of science financing (Polish: Roz-porzadzenie Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyzszego w sprawie kryteriów i trybu przyznawania kategorii naukowej jednostkom naukowym), Dziennik Ustaw Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, 877, 2012.
29. Quarteroni, A., Sacco, R., Saleri, F.: Numerical mathematics, Springer Verlag, 2000.
30. Saaty, T. L.: A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 1977, 234-281, ISSN 0022-2496.
31. Saaty, T. L.: An Exposition on the AHP in Reply to the Paper "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process", Management Science, 36(3), March 1990, 259-268.
32. Saaty, T. L.: The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, vol. 78 of International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer New York, 2005, ISBN 978-0-387-23067-2, 345-405.
33. Saaty, T. L.: Relative Measurement and Its Generalization in Decision Making. Why Pairwise Comparisons are Central in Mathematics for the Measurement of Intangible Factors. The Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process, Estadística e Investigación Operativa/Statistics and Operations Research (RACSAM), 102, November 2008, 251-318.
34. Saaty, T. L., Hu, G.: Ranking by eigenvector versus other methods in the analytic hierarchy process, Applied Mathematics Letters, 11(4), 1998, 121-125.
35. Schlager, N., Lauer, J., Eds.: Science and its times: understanding the social significance of scientific discovery, vol. 2, Schlager Information Group, 2000.
36. Smith, J. E., Von Winterfeldt, D.: Anniversary article: decision analysis in management science, Management Science, 50(5), 2004, 561-574.
37. Subramanian, N., Ramanathan, R.: A review of applications of Analytic Hierarchy Process in operations management, International Journal of Production Economics, 138(2), August 2012, 215-241.
38. Thurstone, L. L.: A Law of Comparative Judgment, reprint of an original work published in 1927, Psychological Review, 101, 1994, 266-270.
39. Vaidya, O. S., Kumar, S.: Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 169(1), February 2006, 1-29.
40. Yuen, K. K. F.: Analytic hierarchy prioritization process in the AHP application development: A prioritization operator selection approach, Appl. Soft Comput., 10(4), 2010, 975-989.
41. Yuen, K. K. F.: Membership Maximization Prioritization Methods for Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 11(2), June 2012, 113-133, ISSN 1568-4539.
42. Yuen, K. K. F.: Fuzzy Cognitive Network Process: Comparison with Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process in New Product Development Strategy, Fuzzy Systems, IEEE Transactions on, PP(99), 2013, 1-1, ISSN 1063-6706.