METHOD FOR WEIGHTS CALCULATION BASED ON INTERVAL MULTIPLICATIVE PAIRWISE COMPARISON MATRIX IN DECISIONMAKING MODELS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15588/1607-3274-2022-3-15Keywords:
interval multiplicative pairwise comparison matrix, consistency, expert judgements, fuzzy preference programming, decision support systems.Abstract
Context. The pairwise comparison method is a component of several decision support methodologies such as the analytic hierarchy and network processes (AHP, ANP), PROMETHEE, TOPSIS and other. This method results in the weight vector of elements of decision-making model and is based on inversely symmetrical pairwise comparison matrices. The evaluation of the elements is carried out mainly by experts under conditions of uncertainty. Therefore, modifications of this method have been explored in recent years, which are based on fuzzy and interval pairwise comparison matrices (IPCMs).
Objective. The purpose of the work is to develop a modified method for calculation of crisp weights based on consistent and inconsistent multiplicative IPCMs of elements of decision-making model.
Method. The proposed modified method is based on consistent and inconsistent multiplicative IPCMs, fuzzy preference programming and results in more reliable weights for the elements of decision-making model in comparison with other known methods. The differences between the proposed method and the known ones are as follows: coefficients that characterize extended intervals for ratios of weights are introduced; membership functions of fuzzy preference relations are proposed, which depend on values of IPCM elements. The introduction of these coefficients and membership functions made it possible to prove the statement about the required coincidence of the calculated weights based on the “upper” and “lower” models. The introduced coefficients can be further used to find the most inconsistent IPCM elements.
Results. Experiments were performed with several IPCMs of different consistency level. The weights on the basis of the considered consistent and weakly consistent IPCMs obtained using the proposed and other known methods have determined the same rankings of the compared objects. Therefore, the results using the proposed method on the basis of such IPCMs do not contradict the results obtained for these types of IPCMs using other known methods. Rankings by the proposed method based on the considered highly inconsistent IPCMs are much closer to rankings based on the corresponding initial undisturbed IPCMs in comparison with rankings obtained using the known FPP method. The most inconsistent elements in the considered IPCMs are found.
Conclusions. The developed method has shown its efficiency, results in more reliable weights and can be used for a wide range of decision support problems, scenario analysis, priority calculation, resource allocation, evaluation of decision alternatives and criteria in various application areas.
References
Larichev O. I. Science and Art of Decision Making. Moscow, Nauka Publisher, 1979, 200 p. (in Russian).
Larichev O. I., Moshkovich H. M., Rebrik S. B. Systematic research into human behavior in multiattribute object classification problems, Acta Psychologica, 1988, Vol. 68, Issue 1–3, pp. 171–182. DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(88)90053-4
Simon H. A. The architecture of complexity, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 1962, Vol. 106, Issue 6. pp. 467–482. https://www.jstor.org/stable/985254
Saaty T. L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1980.
Saaty T. L. The modern science of multicriteria decision making and its practical applications: The AHP/ANP approach, Operations Research, 2013, Vol. 61, Issue 5, pp. 1101–1118. DOI: 10.1287/opre.2013.1197
Bernasconi M.б Choirat C., Seri R. The analytic hierarchy process and the theory of measurement, Management Science, 2010, Vol. 56, Issue 4, pp. 699–711. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1123
Vaidya O. S., Kumar S. Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, Vol. 169, Issue 1, pp. 1–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028
Brunelli M. Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York, Springer, 2015, 83 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-31912502-2
Titenko E. A., Frolov N. S., Khanis A. L. et al. Models for calculation weights for estimation innovative technical objects, Radio Electronics, Computer Science, Control, 2020, No. 3, pp. 181 – 193. DOI: 10.15588/1607-3274-2020-3-17
Melnyk K. V., Hlushko V. N., Borysova N. V. Decision support technology for sprint planning, Radio Electronics, Computer Science, Control, 2020, No. 1, pp. 135–145. DOI: 10.15588/1607-3274-2020-1-14
Rezaei J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model, Omega, 2016, Vol. 64. pp. 126–130. DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2015.12.001
Gwo-Hshiung T., Huang J.-J. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. New York, Chapman and Hall, 2011, 352 p. DOI : 10.1201/b11032
Nedashkovskaya N. I. Method for Evaluation of the Uncertainty of the Paired Comparisons Expert Judgements when Calculating the Decision Alternatives Weights, Journal of Automation and Information Sciences, 2015, Vol. 47, Issue 10, pp. 69–82. DOI: 10.1615/JAutomatInfScien.v47.i10.70
Durbach I., Lahdelma R., Salminen P. The analytic hierarchy process with stochastic judgements, European Journal of Operational Research, 2014, Vol. 238, No. 2, pp. 552– 559. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.03.045
Wang Y.-M., Chin K.-S. An eigenvector method for generating normalized interval and fuzzy weights, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2006, Vol. 181, pp. 1257– 1275. DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2006.02.026
Krejčí J. Fuzzy eigenvector method for obtaining normalized fuzzy weights from fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2017, Vol. 315, pp. 26–43. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2016.03.006
Ramík J. Deriving priority vector from pairwise comparisons matrix with fuzzy elements, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2021, Vol. 422, pp. 68–82. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2020.11.022
Mikhailov L. Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgements, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2003, Vol. 134, Issue 3, pp. 365–385. DOI: 10.1016/S01650114(02)00383-4
Mikhailov L. A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements, European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, Vol.159, Issue 3, pp. 687– 704. DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00432-6
Sugihara K., Ishii H., Tanaka H. Interval priorities in AHP by interval regression analysis, European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, Vol. 158, pp. 745–754. DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00418-1
Wang Y.-M., Yang J.-B., Xu D.-L. A two-stage logarithmic goal programming method for generating weights from interval comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2005, Vol. 152, Issue 3, pp. 475–498. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2004.10.020
Wang Y.-M., Elhag T. M. S. A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix, European Journal of Operational Research, 2007, Vol. 177, Issue 1, pp. 458–471. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.10.066
Liu F. Acceptable consistency analysis of interval reciprocal comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2009, Vol. 160, Issue 18, pp. 2686–2700. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2009.01.010
Entani T., Inuiguchi M. Pairwise comparison based interval analysis for group decision aiding with multiple criteria, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2015, Vol. 274, pp. 79–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2015.03.001
Pankratova N. D., Nedashkovskaya N. I. Estimation of decision alternatives on the basis of interval pairwise comparison matrices, Intelligent Control and Automation, 2016, Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 39–54. DOI: 10.4236/ica.2016.72005
Li K. W., Wang Z.-J., Tong X. Acceptability analysis and priority weight elicitation for interval multiplicative comparison matrices, European Journal of Operational Research, 2016, Vol. 250, Issue 2, pp. 628–638. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.010
Nedashkovskaya N. I. Investigation of methods for improving consistency of a pairwise comparison matrix, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2018, Vol. 69, Issue 12, pp. 1947–1956. DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2017.1415640
Pankratova N. D., Nedashkovskaya N. I. Method for processing fuzzy expert information in prediction problems. Part I, Journal of Automation and Information Sciences, 2007, Vol. 39, Issue 4, pp. 22–36. DOI: 10.1615/jautomatinfscien.v39.i4.30
Kuo T. Interval multiplicative pairwise comparison matrix: Consistency, indeterminacy and normality, Information Sciences, 2020, Vol. 517, pp. 244–253. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2019.12.066
Liu F., Zhang W. G., Fu J. H. A new method of obtaining the priority weights from an interval fuzzy preference relation, Information Sciences, 2012, Vol. 185, Issue 1, pp. 32– 42. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2011.09.019
Xu Y., Li K. W., Wang H. Consistency test and weight generation for additive interval fuzzy preference relations, Soft Computing, 2014, Vol. 18, Issue 8, pp. 1499–1513. DOI: 10.1007/s00500-013-1156-x
Wang Z-J., Yang X., Jin X.-T. And-like-uninorm-based transitivity and analytic hierarchy process with intervalvalued fuzzy preference relations, Information Sciences, 2020, Vol. 539, pp. 375–396. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2020.05.052
Wang Z.-J. A goal programming approach to deriving interval weights in analytic form from interval Fuzzy preference relations based on multiplicative consistency, Information Sciences, 2018, Vol. 462, pp. 160–181. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.06.006
López-Morales V. A reliable method for consistency improving of interval multiplicative preference relations expressed under uncertainty, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 2018, Vol. 17, Issue 5, pp. 1561–1585. DOI: 10.1142/S0219622018500359
Wang Z.-J., Lin J. Consistency and optimized priority weight analytical solutions of interval multiplicative preference relations, Information Sciences, 2019, Vol. 482, pp. 105–122. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2019.01.007.
Nedashkovskaya N. I. The М_Outflow Method for Finding the Most Inconsistent Elements of a Pairwise Comparison Matrix, System Analysis and Information Technologies (SAIT), 17th International Conference, Kyiv, 2015, proceeding. Kyiv, NTUU KPI, 2015, P. 90. http://sait.kpi.ua/media/filer_public/f8/7e/f87e3b7b-b254407f-8a58-2d810d23a2e5/sait2015ebook.pdf
Buckley J. J. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1985, Vol. 17, Issue 3, pp. 233–247. DOI: 10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9
Van Laarhoven P.J.M., Pedrycz W. A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1983, Vol. 11, Issues 1–3, pp. 229–241. DOI: 10.1016/S01650114(83)80082-7
Wang Y.-M., Elhag T. M. S., Hua Z. A modified fuzzy logarithmic least squares method for fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 2006, Vol. 157, Issue 23, pp. 3055–3071. DOI: 10.1016/j.fss.2006.08.010
Zhang F., Ignatius J.,. Lim C. P et al. A new method for deriving priority weights by extracting consistent numericalvalued matrices from interval-valued fuzzy judgement matrix, Information Sciences, 2014, Vol. 279, pp. 280–300. DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2014.03.120
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 N. I. Nedashkovskaya
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Licensing Notifications in the Copyright Notices
The journal allows the authors to hold the copyright without restrictions and to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles.
The journal allows to reuse and remixing of its content, in accordance with a Creative Commons license СС BY -SA.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
-
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY-SA that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
-
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
