Showing papers by "Thomas L. Saaty published in 2010"

The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Measurement Processes: The Measurement of Intangibles Decision Making under Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks

Abstract: Multicriteria thinking demonstrates that in order to make a best choice in a decision, discussion and cause-effect reasoning are inadequate to learn what the best overall outcome is. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its generaliza- tion to dependence and feedback, the Analytic Network Process (ANP), provide a comprehensive structure and mathematics to incorporate measurements for tangible criteria and derive priorities for intangible criteria to enable one to choose a best al- ternative for a decision. It overcomes so-called bounded rationality that is based on the assumption of transitivity by including in its structures and calculations, the sen- sitivity and depth of feelings associated with understanding and the imagination and awareness needed to address all the concerns. The AHP can cope with the inherent subjectivity in all decision making, and make it explicit to the stakeholders through relative quantitative priorities. It also provides the means to validate outcomes when measurements are available to show that it does not do number crunching without meaningful justification. It can deal with the benefits, opportunities, costs and risks separately and bring them together to determine the best overall outcome. One can also perform dynamic sensitivity analysis of changes in judgments to ensure that the best outcome is stable. In an award from the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sci- ences (INFORMS) given to the author in October 2008 it is written: "The AHP has revolutionized how we resolve complex decision problems ... the AHP has been applied worldwide to help decision makers in every conceivable decision context across both the public and private sectors, with literally thousands of reported appli- cations."

The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Measurement Processes: The Measurement of Intangibles

Abstract: Multicriteria thinking demonstrates that in order to make a best choice in a decision, discussion and cause-effect reasoning are inadequate to learn what the best overall outcome is. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its generalization to dependence and feedback, the Analytic Network Process (ANP), provide a comprehensive structure and mathematics to incorporate measurements for tangible criteria and derive priorities for intangible criteria to enable one to choose a best alternative for a decision. It overcomes so-called bounded rationality that is based on the assumption of transitivity by including in its structures and calculations, the sensitivity and depth of feelings associated with understanding and the imagination and awareness needed to address all the concerns. The AHP can cope with the inherent subjectivity in all decision making, and make it explicit to the stakeholders through relative quantitative priorities. It also provides the means to validate outcomes when measurements are available to show that it does not do number crunching without meaningful justification. It can deal with the benefits, opportunities, costs and risks separately and bring them together to determine the best overall outcome. One can also perform dynamic sensitivity analysis of changes in judgments to ensure that the best outcome is stable. In an award from the Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS) given to the author in October 2008 it is written: “The AHP has revolutionized how we resolve complex decision problems... the AHP has been applied worldwide to help decision makers in every conceivable decision context across both the public and private sectors, with literally thousands of reported applications.”

Fuzzy Judgments and Fuzzy Sets

Abstract: Using fuzzy set theory has become attractive to many people. However, the many references cited here and in other works, little thought is given to why numbers should be made fuzzy before plunging into the necessary simulations to crank out numbers without giving reason or proof that it works to one’s advantage. In fact it does not often do that, certainly not in decision making. Regrettably, many published papers that use fuzzy set theory presumably to get better answers were not judged thoroughly by reviewers knowledgeable in both fuzzy theory and decision making. Buede and Maxwell (1995), who had done experiments on different ways of making decisions, found that fuzzy does the poorest job of obtaining the right decision as compared with other ways. “These experiments demonstrated that the MAVT (Multiattribute Value Theory) and AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) techniques, when provided with the same decision outcome data, very often identify the same alternatives as ‘best’. The other techniques are noticeably less consistent with the Fuzzy algorithm being the least consistent.â€

The scope of human values and human activities in decision making

Abstract: Decision making was long in need of methods of prioritization but now needs to complete the scope of its structures to become a dependable science that can be helpful on the micro level. Most of the factors that determine the structure of a decision depend largely on the feelings and memories of the decision makers and that leaves room for doubt about the completeness of the decision. The decision makers would be helped by having available a general well-researched list of factors for some of their complex decisions in order to have greater assurance that their decisions are comprehensive and right. To do that, they must have wide exposure and be familiar with the full spectrum of human values and environmental opportunities. Our concern is about structuring decisions in a reliable way to serve the needs of decision makers. A very broad framework is provided in this paper to address this issue.

The Analytic Hierarchy Process in the Transportation Sector

Abstract: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a well-known multi-criteria decision making method that has been applied to solve problems in diverse areas. The present paper deals with applications of the AHP in the transportation sector. We describe three applications of the AHP namely, (1) A governmental agency with jurisdiction over a certain area must decide on whether to build or not to build a bridge or a tunnel across a river presently served by a privately owned ferry. The factors or control criteria which affect both the benefits and costs of crossing a river are given in two hierarchies that fall into three categories: economic, social, and environmental. The decision is made in terms of the ratios of the priorities of the alternatives from the benefits hierarchy to those from the costs hierarchy although the AHP also has a second way to synthesize benefits and costs involving strategic criteria not used in this example. (2) In planning alternative strategies for the future of the Sudan’s transport system, the method of anticipatory scenario construction was used. The construction of the composite scenario was based on the use of the method of priorities to compare the individual scenarios as to their feasibility and desirability to the various forces which will shape changes in Sudanese society. (3) Here we apply the dependence with a feedback system in making a decision to buy a car made by an American, a European, or a Japanese company on the basis of three criteria: cost, repair, and durability.

Who Won the Winter 2010 Olympics?: A Quest into Priorities and Rankings

Abstract: During and at the end of Olympic games, we are always given the number of gold, silver and bronze medals won by each country and often the total number won as an indicator of the surmised winner. The groups that report the medal count in this manner indicate that they believe all medals are the same, regardless of the kind of medal involved. Perhaps one reason it is done this way is because there has not been a scientific way to assign appropriate weights to each type of medal. This paper explores use of the measurement theory, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), to quantify the values of gold, silver and bronze medals and use these values to compute the total value of the medals won by the leading countries in order to determine which country may be considered the winner of the 21st Winter Olympics held February 12–28, 2010, in Vancouver, Canada. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Eigenvector in Lay Language

Abstract: Decision making depends on identifying a structure of criteria and alternatives of a decision. It also depends on experience and judgments to select the best alternative. In the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for decision making the criteria and alternatives are prioritized by forming matrices of judgments and from these judgments priorities are derived for each matrix in the form of the principal eigenvector. An eigenvector is a technical mathematical idea that would benefit from a simplifying explanation. That is what this note does - in two ways. http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v2i2.87

The analytic hierarchy process in transportation sector

Abstract: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a well-known multi-criteria decision making method that has been applied to solve problems in diverse areas. The present paper deals with applications of the AHP in the transportation sector. We describe three applications of the AHP namely, (1) A governmental agency with jurisdiction over a certain area must decide on whether to build or not to build a bridge or a tunnel across a river presently served by a privately owned ferry. The factors or control criteria which affect both the benefits and costs of crossing a river are given in two hierarchies that fall into three categories: economic, social, and environmental. The decision is made in terms of the ratios of the priorities of the alternatives from the benefits hierarchy to those from the costs hierarchy although the AHP also has a second way to synthesize benefits and costs involving strategic criteria not used in this example. (2) In planning alternative strategies for the future of the Sudan's transport system, the method of anticipatory scenario construction was used. The construction of the composite scenario was based on the use of the method of priorities to compare the individual scenarios as to their feasibility and desirability to the various forces which will shape changes in Sudanese society. (3) Here we apply the dependence with a feedback system in making a decision to buy a car made by an American, a European, or a Japanese company on the basis of three criteria: cost, repair, and durability.