A new data envelopment analysis method for priority determination and group decision making in the analytic hierarchy process

被引:58
作者
Wang, Ying-Ming [1 ,2 ]
Chin, Kwai-Sang [2 ]
机构
[1] Fuzhou Univ, Inst Soft Sci, Fuzhou 350002, Peoples R China
[2] City Univ Hong Kong, Dept Mfg Engn & Engn Management, Kowloon Tong, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Data envelopment analysis; Analytic hierarchy process; DEAHP; Group decision making; Multiple criteria decision making;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejor.2008.01.049
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
The DEAHP method for weight deviation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has been found flawed and sometimes produces counterintuitive priority vectors for inconsistent pairwise comparison matrices, which makes its application very restrictive. This paper proposes a new data envelopment analysis (DEA) method for priority determination in the AHP and extends it to the group AHP situation. In this new DEA methodology, two specially constructed DEA models that differ from the DEAHP model are used to derive the best local priorities from a pairwise comparison matrix or a group of pairwise comparison matrices no matter whether they are perfectly consistent or inconsistent. The new DEA method produces true weights for perfectly consistent pairwise comparison matrices and the best local priorities that are logical and consistent with decision makers (DMs)' subjective judgments for inconsistent pairwise comparison matrices. In hierarchical structures, the new DEA method utilizes the simple additive weighting (SAW) method for aggregation of the best local priorities without the need of normalization. Numerical examples are examined throughout the paper to show the advantages of the new DEA methodology and its potential applications in both the AHP and group decision making. (c) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 250
页数:12
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   ON A SHORT-COMING OF SAATY METHOD OF ANALYTIC HIERARCHIES [J].
BELTON, V ;
GEAR, T .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1983, 11 (03) :228-230
[2]   MEASURING EFFICIENCY OF DECISION-MAKING UNITS [J].
CHARNES, A ;
COOPER, WW ;
RHODES, E .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1978, 2 (06) :429-444
[3]   COMPARISON OF 2 METHODS FOR DETERMINING THE WEIGHTS OF BELONGING TO FUZZY-SETS [J].
CHU, ATW ;
KALABA, RE ;
SPINGARN, K .
JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 1979, 27 (04) :531-538
[4]   EIGENWEIGHT VECTORS AND LEAST-DISTANCE APPROXIMATION FOR REVEALED PREFERENCE IN PAIRWISE WEIGHT RATIOS [J].
COGGER, KO ;
YU, PL .
JOURNAL OF OPTIMIZATION THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 1985, 46 (04) :483-491
[5]  
Crawford G. B., 1987, Mathematical Modelling, V9, P327, DOI 10.1016/0270-0255(87)90489-1
[6]  
Hwang C-L., 1981, Multiple Attribute Decision Making, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, DOI [10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9]
[7]   JUDGEMENTAL MODELING BASED ON GEOMETRIC LEAST-SQUARE [J].
ISLEI, G ;
LOCKETT, AG .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1988, 36 (01) :27-35
[8]  
Mikhailov L, 2000, J OPER RES SOC, V51, P341, DOI 10.2307/254092
[9]   Data envelopment analysis for weight derivation and aggregation in the analytic hierarchy process [J].
Ramanathan, R .
COMPUTERS & OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2006, 33 (05) :1289-1307
[10]  
Saaty T.L., 2000, Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process, DOI [10.1007/978-3-642-50244-6_4, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-50244-6_4, 10.1007/978-3-642-50244-64, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-50244-64]