𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

On the invalidity of fuzzifying numerical judgments in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

✍ Scribed by Thomas L. Saaty; Liem T. Tran

Publisher
Elsevier Science
Year
2007
Tongue
English
Weight
442 KB
Volume
46
Category
Article
ISSN
0895-7177

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis

Fuzzy set theory has serious difficulties in producing valid answers in decision-making by fuzzifying judgments. No theorems are available about its workability when it is applied indiscriminately as a number crunching approach to numerical measurements that represent judgments. When judgments are allowed to vary in choice over the values of a fundamental scale, as in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, these judgments are themselves already fuzzy. To make them fuzzier can make the validity of the outcome, when the actual outcome is known, worse, as shown by several examples in this paper. Also, improving the consistency of a judgment matrix does not necessarily improve the validity of the outcome. Validity is the goal in decision-making, not consistency, which can be successively improved by manipulating the judgments as the answer gets farther and farther from reality. An example of this is included.

πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES

On the measurement of preferences in the
On the measurement of preferences in the analytic hierarchy process
✍ Ahti A. Salo; Raimo P. HΓ€mΓ€lΓ€inen πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1997 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 365 KB πŸ‘ 3 views

In this paper we apply multiattribute value theory as a framework for examining the use of pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). On one hand our analysis indicates that pairwise comparisons should be understood in terms of preference differences between pairs of alternatives.

When to combine group judgments and when
When to combine group judgments and when not to in the analytic hierarchy process: A new method
✍ I. Basak πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1988 πŸ› Elsevier Science 🌐 English βš– 669 KB

## In paired comparisons, the individuals in a number of groups giving their judgments are examined for agreement among themselves. Statistical methods are applied to see whether these groups are significantly different in giving their judgments or not. When individual judgments are homogeneous, a