Development of Modified Ratio of Pairwise Comparison for Determining Weighting in AHP

여규동; 김길호; Sang-Won Lee

doi:10.15793/kspr.2011.71..002

It is important that a weighting of assessment elements is exactly estimated for group decision making. The purposes of this study are to analysis the problem for the existing method of weighting estimation and to develop a improved method. To achieve this, we carried out a survey of three types(AHP, direct point allocation, direct pair comparison) on two separate occasions and elicited the relation of interval of scale and weighting from the survey data. Furthermore, we developed the new modified ratio by using the relation of interval of scale and weight as a weighting estimation method. On a comparison result for the weighting of modified ratio and existing ratio, recognized weighting by respondents was closer modified ratio than existing ratio. From the result of analysis for the “Water Quality : Ecology․Landscape”, relative errors of existing ratio(AIJ/AIP) are 21.36%/17.09% and -30.66%/-24.52% and relative errors of modified ratio(AIJ/AIP) are 5.22%/4.40% and -7.49%/-6.31% respectively. By using the modified ratio of scale interval, we can estimate the weighting that the questionnaire respondents consider and clear away the controversy about AIJ and AIP. This study is expected to provide a weighting estimation method that can derive a decision-maker’s intention in many different fields.

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (8)
열림/닫힘 버튼
REFERENCES (19)
열림/닫힘 버튼
* 2021년 이후 발행 논문의 참고문헌은 현재 구축 중입니다.

[book] 이창효 / 1999 / 다기준의사결정론 / 세종출판사

[book] 한국개발연구원 / 2003 / 수자원(댐)부문사업의 예비타당성조사 표준지침 연구. 제3판 / 한국개발연구원

[report] 한국개발연구원 / 2004 / 예비타당성조사 수행을 위한 일반지침 수정․보완 연구 / 한국개발연구원

[report] 한국수자원공사 / 2002 / 기존댐 합리적 용수배분을 위한 수리권 조정 방안 연구 / 한국수자원공사

[journal] Aczél, J / 1983 / Procedures for Synthesizing Ratio Judgments / Journal of Mathematical Psychology 27(1) : 93~102

[journal] Aczél, J / 1989 / On the Possible Merging Functions / Mathematical Social Sciences 17 : 205~243

[journal] Bryson, N / 1996 / Group Decision Making and the Analytic Hierarchy Process: Exploring the Consensus Relevant Information Content / Computers and Operations Research 23 : 27~35

[journal] Chou, M. T / 2007 / Synthesizing Comparison Matrices of AHP Under Group Decision / Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4693 : 1323~1330

[journal] Dodd, F. J. / 1995 / Scale Horizons in Analytic Hierarchies / Journal of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis 4 : 177~188

[journal] Forman, E / 1998 / Aggregating Individual Judgments and Priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process / European Journal of Operational Research 108 : 165~169

[journal] Harker, P. T / 1987 / The Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Satty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process / Management Science 33 : 1383~1403

[journal] Ishizaka, A. / 2011 / Influence of Aggregation and Measurement Scale on Ranking a Compromise Alternative in AHP / Journal of Operational Research Society 62(4) : 700~710

[journal] Lootsma, F. A / 1989 / Conflict Resolution via Pairwise Comparison of Concessions / European Journal of Operational Research 40 : 109~116

[journal] Ma, D / 1991 / 9/9-9/1 Scale Method of AHP / Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on the AHP 1 : 197~202

[book] Saaty, T. L / 1980 / The Analytic Hierarchy Process / McGraw-Hill Inc

[book] Saaty, T. L. / 1995 / Decision making for leaders / RWS Publications

[journal] Salo, A. A / 1997 / On the Measurement of Preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy Process / Journal of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis 6 : 309~319

[journal] Wu, W. / 2008 / Comparing the Aggregation Methods in the Analytic Hierarchy Process when Uniform Distribution / WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics 5(3) : 82~87

[web] / 2011 / http://www.riss.kr/index.do / http://www.riss.kr/index.do

KJC Korea
Journal Central

Statistics

Tools

Sharing

Issue List

Citation status