IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v224y2013i1p180-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models

Author

Listed:
  • May, Jerrold H.
  • Shang, Jennifer
  • Tjader, Youxu Cai
  • Vargas, Luis G.

Abstract

In this paper we develop a methodology to study the sensitivity and the stability of models built using the Analytic Network Process. We study two types of stability: core and solution stability. The former deals with finding the region of the perturbation space in which the initial solution (i.e., the alternative that is ranked first) obtained from the ANP model remains most preferred. The latter deals with finding the regions of the perturbation space in which the solutions that were not initially most preferred (i.e., alternatives that were not ranked first) become most preferred (i.e., they are ranked first). The methodology consists of three stages: generation of the perturbation space, finding the boundaries of the regions in the perturbation space in which the different alternatives are ranked first, and finding the stability regions.

Suggested Citation

  • May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Tjader, Youxu Cai & Vargas, Luis G., 2013. "A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 180-188.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:224:y:2013:i:1:p:180-188
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.07.035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221712005760
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.07.035?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 2003. "Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 85-91, February.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    3. Alfredo Altuzarra & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador, 2010. "Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making: A Bayesian Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1755-1773, December.
    4. Aguaron, Juan & Moreno-Jimenez, Jose Maria, 2000. "Local stability intervals in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 113-132, August.
    5. Paulson, Dan & Zahir, Sajjad, 1995. "Consequences of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process: A simulation approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 45-56, November.
    6. Chen, Hongyi & Kocaoglu, Dundar F., 2008. "A sensitivity analysis algorithm for hierarchical decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 266-288, February.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Taraneh Sowlati & Pooria Assadi & Joseph C. Paradi, 2010. "Developing a mathematical programming model for sensitivity analysis in analytic hierarchy process," International Journal of Mathematics in Operational Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(3), pages 290-301.
    9. Lipovetsky, Stan & Tishler, Asher, 1999. "Interval estimation of priorities in the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-164, April.
    10. Cheng-Ru Wu & Che-Wei Chang & Hung-Lung Lin, 2007. "An organisational performance measurement model based on AHP sensitivity analysis," International Journal of Business Performance Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 77-91.
    11. Arbel, Ami, 1989. "Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 317-326, December.
    12. Saaty, Thomas L. & Vargas, Luis G., 1987. "Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 107-117, October.
    13. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2012. "Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-3597-6, April.
    14. MacKay, David B. & Bowen, William M. & Zinnes, Joseph L., 1996. "A Thurstonian view of the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 427-444, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kellner, Florian & Lienland, Bernhard & Utz, Sebastian, 2019. "An a posteriori decision support methodology for solving the multi-criteria supplier selection problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(2), pages 505-522.
    2. Caporale, Diana & Sangiorgio, Valentino & Amodio, Alessandro & De Lucia, Caterina, 2020. "Multi-criteria and focus group analysis for social acceptance of wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    3. Theißen, Sebastian & Spinler, Stefan, 2014. "Strategic analysis of manufacturer-supplier partnerships: An ANP model for collaborative CO2 reduction management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(2), pages 383-397.
    4. M. Gabriela Sava & Luis G. Vargas & Jerrold H. May & James G. Dolan, 2020. "An analysis of the sensitivity and stability of patients’ preferences can lead to more appropriate medical decisions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 863-901, October.
    5. M. Gabriela Sava & Luis G. Vargas & Jerrold H. May & James G. Dolan, 2022. "Multi-dimensional stability analysis for Analytic Network Process models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1401-1424, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.
    2. Xu, Zeshui & Chen, Jian, 2008. "Some models for deriving the priority weights from interval fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 266-280, January.
    3. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    4. Finan, J. S. & Hurley, W. J., 1999. "Transitive calibration of the AHP verbal scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 367-372, January.
    5. Lipovetsky, Stan & Tishler, Asher, 1999. "Interval estimation of priorities in the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-164, April.
    6. Leung, L. C. & Cao, D., 2000. "On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 102-113, July.
    7. Escobar, M. T. & Moreno-Jimenez, J. M., 2000. "Reciprocal distributions in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(1), pages 154-174, May.
    8. M. Gabriela Sava & Luis G. Vargas & Jerrold H. May & James G. Dolan, 2022. "Multi-dimensional stability analysis for Analytic Network Process models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(2), pages 1401-1424, September.
    9. Dede, Georgia & Kamalakis, Thomas & Sphicopoulos, Thomas, 2016. "Theoretical estimation of the probability of weight rank reversal in pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 252(2), pages 587-600.
    10. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    11. Yulan Wang & Huayou Chen & Ligang Zhou, 2013. "Logarithm Compatibility of Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations with an Application to Determining the Optimal Weights of Experts in the Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 759-772, July.
    12. Hahn, Eugene D., 2006. "Link function selection in stochastic multicriteria decision making models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(1), pages 86-100, July.
    13. Wu, Zhibin & Huang, Shuai & Xu, Jiuping, 2019. "Multi-stage optimization models for individual consistency and group consensus with preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 182-194.
    14. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    15. Kang Xu & Jiuping Xu, 2020. "A direct consistency test and improvement method for the analytic hierarchy process," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 359-388, September.
    16. Stein, William E. & Mizzi, Philip J., 2007. "The harmonic consistency index for the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 488-497, February.
    17. Guo, Min & Yang, Jian-Bo & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Wang, Hongwei, 2007. "Evidential reasoning based preference programming for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(3), pages 1294-1312, November.
    18. Ergu, Daji & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Shi, Yong, 2011. "A simple method to improve the consistency ratio of the pair-wise comparison matrix in ANP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 246-259, August.
    19. Zeshui Xu & Xiaoqiang Cai, 2014. "Deriving Weights from Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations in Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 695-713, July.
    20. Vetschera, Rudolf, 1996. "Multi-criteria agency theory," Discussion Papers, Series I 280, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:224:y:2013:i:1:p:180-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.