2015Advances in intelligent systems research/Advances in Intelligent Systems ResearchOpen access

Comparison of belief AHP models using a simulation study

Amel Ennaceur, Zied Elouedi, Éric Lefèvre

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method, as its own name suggests, is for use in situations when more than one criterion must be considered.In this work, we will focus on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), one of the well-known and most widely used MCDM approaches.Despite the extensive application of this method in various fields of decision making, AHP has been combined within uncertain theories, in particular the belief function theory, to handle uncertainty in the pair-wise comparison process.Therefore, this paper intends to describe some comparisons on the standard AHP and other belief AHP models to judge their accuracy.We use a simulation approach to compare the results of the different models based on different matrices dimensions.We observe a high level of agreement between the different techniques and we can conclude that the number of ranking contradictions increases with the dimension of the matrix.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method, as its own name suggests, is for use in situations when more than one criterion must be considered.In this work, we will focus on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), one of the well-known and most widely used MCDM approaches.Despite the extensive application of this method in various fields of decision making, AHP has been combined within uncertain theories, in particular the belief function theory, to handle uncertainty in the pair-wise comparison process.Therefore, this paper intends to describe some comparisons on the standard AHP and other belief AHP models to judge their accuracy.We use a simulation approach to compare the results of the different models based on different matrices dimensions.We observe a high level of agreement between the different techniques and we can conclude that the number of ranking contradictions increases with the dimension of the matrix.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method, as its own name suggests, is for use in situations when more than one criterion must be considered.In this work, we will focus on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), one of the well-known and most widely used MCDM approaches.Despite the extensive application of this method in various fields of decision making, AHP has been combined within uncertain theories, in particular the belief function theory, to handle uncertainty in the pair-wise comparison process.Therefore, this paper intends to describe some comparisons on the standard AHP and other belief AHP models to judge their accuracy.We use a simulation approach to compare the results of the different models based on different matrices dimensions.We observe a high level of agreement between the different techniques and we can conclude that the number of ranking contradictions increases with the dimension of the matrix.

Key concepts: Analytic hierarchy process, Multiple-criteria decision analysis, Ranking (information retrieval), Computer science, Dimension (graph theory), Focus (optics), Function (biology), Process (computing)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of belief AHP models using a simulation study — Research Paper | ScholarLens