Abstract
An approach to collective decision-making based on the analytic hierarchy process is proposed. This approach is based on the mechanism of constructing aggregated matrices of pairwise comparisons. The key point of this mechanism is to reconcile the polar opinions of experts on the preference of alternatives. Such harmonization of opinions is implemented by choosing the most fair hypothesis. The basis for this choice is the degree of confidence in the validity of this hypothesis. The degree of confidence is calculated using the Shortliff combination function. Coordination of polar opinions of experts is a computational model of group choice, which is an independent component and can be used as a basis for the development of collective decision-making procedures. The proposed approach is quite natural and easy to use and harmoniously forms a single whole within the analytic hierarchy process.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
N. Bhushan and K. Rai, Strategic Decision Making: Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Springer, London (2004).
W. Wu, G. Kou, Y. Peng, and D. Ergu, “Improved AHP-group decision making for investment strategy selection,” Technological and Economic Development of Economy, Vol. 18, Iss. 2, 299–316 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2012.680520.
N. N. Seredenko, “Development of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP),” Otkrytoye Obrazovaniye, No. 2–1, 39–48 (2011).
V. G. Khalin and G. V. Chernova, Decision Support Systems [in Russian], Urait, Moscow (2019).
Yu. Ya. Samokhvalov, “Group accounting of relative alternative superiority in decision-making problems,” Cybern. Syst. Analysis, Vol. 39, No. 6, 897–900 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CASA.0000020231.09571.33.
W. Wu, G. Kou, and Y. Peng, “Group decision-making using improved multi-criteria decision making methods for credit risk analysis,” Filomat, Vol. 30, Iss. 15, 4135–4150 (2016). https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL1615135W.
A. K. Kar and G. Khatwani, “A Group decision support system for selecting a socialCRM,” in: S. Thampi, A. Gelbukh, and J. Mukhopadhyay (eds.), Advances in Signal Processing and Intelligent Recognition Systems. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Vol. 264, Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04960-1_9.
T. L. Saaty and K. Peniwati, Group Decision Making: Drawing out and Reconciling Differences, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh (2008).
K. Peniwati, “Group decision making: Drawing out and reconciling differences,” Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process, Vol. 9, No. 3, 385–389 (2017). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i3.533.
E. Forman and K. Peniwati, “Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., Vol. 108, Iss. 1, 165–169 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(97)00244-0.
P. Grošelj, L. Z. Stirn, N. Ayrilmis, and M. K. Kuzman, “Comparison of some aggregation techniques using group analytic hierarchy process,” Expert Syst. Appl., Vol. 42, 2198–2204 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.
M. Bernasconi, C. Choirat, and R. Seri, “Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., Vol. 232, Iss. 3, 584–592 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.06.014.
Yu. Ya. Samokhvalov, “Distinctive features of using the method of analysis of hierarchies in estimating problems on the basis of metric criteria,” Cybern. Syst. Analysis, Vol. 40, No. 5, 639–642 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-005-0002-2.
M. Beynon, “DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2002. Vol. 140, Iss. 1, 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00230-2.
M. J. Beynon, “A method of aggregation in DS/AHP for group decision-making with the non-equivalent importance of individuals in the group,” Comput. Oper. Res., Vol. 32, No. 7, 1881–1896 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2003.12.004.
L. F. Gulyanitskii, O. V. Volkovich, and S. A. Malyshko, “An approach to formalization and analysis of group choice problems,” Cybern. Syst. Analysis, Vol. 30, No. 3, 413–418 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02366476.
ISO/IEC TR 15443-1:2005 “Information technology — Security techniques — A framework for IT security assurance. Part 1: Overview and framework.” URL: https://www.iso.org/standard/39733.html.
E. H. Shortliffe, Computer-Based Medical Consultations: MYCIN, Elsevier (1976). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-00179-5.X5001-X.
B. G. Buchanan and E. H. Shortliffe (eds.), Rule-Based Expert Systems: The MYCIN Experiments of the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA (1984).
A. S. Dulesov and M. Yu. Semenova, “Subjective probability in determining the measure of the uncertainty of the state of an object,” Fundamental’nyye Issledovaniya, No. 3, 81–86 (2012).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Translated from Kibernetyka ta Systemnyi Analiz, No. 5, September–October, 2022, pp. 98–104.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Samokhvalov, Y.Y. Developing the Analytic Hierarchy Process Under Collective Decision-Making Based on Aggregated Matrices of Pairwise Comparisons. Cybern Syst Anal 58, 758–763 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-022-00509-3
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-022-00509-3