UDC 519.816
1 Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine
 yu1953@ukr.net
|
|
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS UNDER COLLECTIVE
DECISION-MAKING BASED ON AGGREGATED MATRICES OF PAIRWISE COMPARISONS
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. In general, the proposed approach is quite natural
and easy to use and harmoniously forms a single whole within the analytic hierarchy process.
Keywords: collective decision-making, ranking, expert, hierarchy analysis method, confidence coefficients.
FULL TEXT
REFERENCES
- Bhushan N., K. Rai K. Strategic decision making: Applying the analytic hierarchy process. London: Springer, 2004. 172 p.
- Wu W., Kou G., Peng Y., Ergu D. Improved AHP-group decision making for investment strategy selection. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 2012. Vol. 18, Iss. 2. P. 299–316. https://doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2012.680520.
- Seredenko N.N. Development of the hierarchy analysis method (HAM). Otkrytoye obrazovaniye. 2011. N 2–1. P. 39–48.
- Khalin V.G., Chernova G.V. Decision support systems [in Russian]. Moscow: Yurayt, 2019. 494 p.
- Samokhvalov Y.Y. Group accounting of relative alternative superiority in decision-making problems. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis. 2003. Vol. 39, N 6. P. 897–900. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CASA.0000020231.09571.33 .
- Wu W., Kou G., Peng Y. Group decision-making using improved multi-criteria decision making methods for credit risk analysis. Filomat. 2016. Vol. 30, Iss. 15. P. 4135–4150. https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL1615135W .
- Kar A.K., Khatwani G. A group decision support system for selecting a socialCRM. Thampi S., Gelbukh A., Mukhopadhyay J. (Eds.). Advances in Signal Processing and Intelligent Recognition Systems. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Cham: Springer, 2014. Vol. 264. P. 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04960-1_9.
- Saaty T., Peniwati K. Group decision making: Drawing out and reconciling differences, Pittsburgh: Rws Publications, 2008. 385 p.
- Peniwati K. Group decision making: drawing out and reconciling differences. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. 2017. Vol. 9, N 3. P. 385–389. https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i3.533.
- Forman E., Peniwati K. Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research. 1998. Vol. 108, Iss. 1. P. 165–169. https://doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(97)00244-0.
- Groelj P., Zadnik Stirn L., Ayrilmis N., Kuzman M.K. Comparison of some aggregation techniques using group analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications. 2015. Vol. 42. P. 2198–2204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa .
- Bernasconi M., Choirat C., Seri R. Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence. European Journal of Operational Research. 2014. Vol. 232, N 3. P. 584–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor .
- Samokhvalov Y.Y. Distinctive features of using the method of analysis of hierarchies in estimating problems on the basis of metric criteria. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis. 2004. Vol. 40, N 5. P. 639–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-005-0002-2.
- Malcolm B. DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research. 2002. Vol. 140, Iss. 1. P. 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00230-2.
- Malcolm B. A method of aggregation in DS/AHP for group decision-making with the non-equivalent importance of individuals in the group. Computers and Operations Research. 2005. Vol. 32, N 7. Р. 1881–1896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2003.12.004.
- Gulyanitsky, L.F., Volkovich O.V., Malyshko S.A. One approach to the formalization and analysis of group choice problems. Kibernetika. 1994. N 3. P. 120–127.
- 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 .
- Shortliffe E. Computer-based medical consultations: MYCIN. Elsevier, 1976, 264 p. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-00179-5.X5001-X .
- Buchanan B., Shortliffe E. Rule-based expert systems: The MYCIN experiments of the Stanford heuristic programming project. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1984. 754 p.
- Dulesov A.S., Semenova M.Yu. Subjective probability in determining the measure of the uncertainty of the state of the object. Fundamentalʹnyye issledovaniya. 2012. N 3. P. 81–86.
