IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v87y1995i1p45-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consequences of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process: A simulation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Paulson, Dan
  • Zahir, Sajjad

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:87:y:1995:i:1:p:45-56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0377-2217(94)00044-D
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    3. Fatemeh Zahedi, 1986. "Group Consensus Function Estimation When Preferences are Uncertain," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 883-894, December.
    4. Arbel, Ami & Vargas, Luis G., 1993. "Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 200-209, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Sajjad Zahir, M., 1991. "Incorporating the uncertainty of decision judgements in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 206-216, July.
    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. Vetschera, Rudolf, 1996. "Multi-criteria agency theory," Discussion Papers, Series I 280, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    2. Lipovetsky, Stan & Michael Conklin, W., 2002. "Robust estimation of priorities in the AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 110-122, February.
    3. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2000. "A multi-criteria agency model with incomplete preference information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 152-165, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1998. "A simulation approach for handling uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 116-122, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Fatih Tüysüz, 2018. "Simulated Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets-Based Approach for Modeling Uncertainty in AHP Method," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(03), pages 801-817, May.
    11. Easley, Robert F. & Valacich, Joseph S. & Venkataramanan, M. A., 2000. "Capturing group preferences in a multicriteria decision," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 73-83, August.
    12. A Jessop, 2011. "Using imprecise estimates for weights," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1048-1055, June.
    13. L. Sun & B. S. Greenberg, 2006. "Multicriteria Group Decision Making: Optimal Priority Synthesis from Pairwise Comparisons," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 317-339, August.
    14. 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.
    15. Tam, C.M. & Tong, Thomas K.L. & Chiu, Gerald W.C., 2006. "Comparing non-structural fuzzy decision support system and analytical hierarchy process in decision-making for construction problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(2), pages 1317-1324, October.
    16. Peng Sun & Jiawei Yang & Yongfeng Zhi, 2019. "Multi-attribute decision-making method based on Taylor expansion," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 15(3), pages 15501477198, March.

    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. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Van den Honert, R. C., 1998. "Stochastic group preference modelling in the multiplicative AHP: A model of group consensus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 99-111, October.
    5. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1998. "A simulation approach for handling uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 116-122, April.
    6. Sugihara, Kazutomi & Ishii, Hiroaki & Tanaka, Hideo, 2004. "Interval priorities in AHP by interval regression analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 745-754, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    9. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Berumen, Sergio A. & Pérez-Megino, Luis P., 2016. "Ranking Socioeconómico para el Desarrollo de las Regiones Carboníferas en Europa || Socioeconomic Ranking for the Development of coal-mining regions in Europe," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 21(1), pages 39-57, June.
    12. Asadabadi, Mehdi Rajabi, 2017. "A customer based supplier selection process that combines quality function deployment, the analytic network process and a Markov chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 1049-1062.
    13. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Raquel Quiroga-García & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2022. "An extended best–worst multiple reference point method: application in the assessment of non-life insurance companies," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 5323-5362, November.
    14. 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.
    15. Oryani, Bahareh & Koo, Yoonmo & Rezania, Shahabaldin & Shafiee, Afsaneh, 2021. "Barriers to renewable energy technologies penetration: Perspective in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 971-983.
    16. 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.
    17. Haines, Linda M., 1998. "A statistical approach to the analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements. (I). Distributions on feasible regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 112-125, October.
    18. Jiménez, Antonio & Mateos, Alfonso & Ríos-Insua, Sixto, 2009. "Missing consequences in multiattribute utility theory," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 395-410, April.
    19. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:87:y:1995:i:1:p:45-56. 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.