Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of existing FAHP decision-making methods

  • Original Article
  • Published:
EURO Journal on Decision Processes

Abstract

Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) has been extensively applied to multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). However, the computational burden resulting from the calculation of fuzzy eigenvalue and eigenvector is heavy. As a result, a FAHP problem is usually solved using approximation techniques such as fuzzy geometric mean (FGM) and fuzzy extent analysis (FEA) instead of exact methods. Therefore, the FAHP results are subject to considerable inaccuracy. To solve this problem, in this study, a FAHP method based on the combination of α-cut operations (ACO), center-of-gravity (COG) defuzzification and defuzzification convergence mechanism (DCM) is proposed. First, ACO is applied to derive the near-exact fuzzy maximal eigenvalue and fuzzy weights. Subsequently, the α cuts of the fuzzy maximal eigenvalue and fuzzy weights are interpolated to generate samples that are uniformly distributed along the x-axis so that COG can be correctly applied to defuzzify the fuzzy maximal eigenvalue and fuzzy weights. To accelerate the computation process, DCM is applied to terminate the enumeration process if the defuzzified values of fuzzy weights have converged. The ACO–COG–DCM method has been applied to a real case to illustrate its applicability. In addition, a simulation study was also conducted to perform a parametric analysis. According to the experimental results, the proposed ACO–COG–DCM method improved the accuracy of estimating fuzzy weights by up to 56%. Furthermore, the experimental results also showed that the inaccuracy of estimating fuzzy weights was mostly owing to the deficiency of the FAHP method rather than the inconsistency of fuzzy pairwise comparison results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(Data source: Google Scholar)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmed F, Kilic K (2015) Modification to fuzzy extent analysis and its performance analysis. In: 6th international conference on industrial engineering and systems management (IESM), Seville, Spain

  • Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Business Performance Management Singapore (2013) AHP—high consistency ratio. https://bpmsg.com/ahp-high-consistency-ratio/

  • Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95(3):649–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen TCT (2020) Guaranteed-consensus posterior-aggregation fuzzy analytic hierarchy process method. Neural Comput Appl 32:7057–7068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng CH, Mon DL (1994) Evaluating weapon system by analytical hierarchy process based on fuzzy scales. Fuzzy Sets Syst 63(1):1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csutora R, Buckley JJ (2001) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis: the Lambda-Max method. Fuzzy Sets Syst 120(2):181–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donais FM, Abi-Zeid I, Waygood EOD, Lavoie R (2019) A review of cost–benefit analysis and multicriteria decision analysis from the perspective of sustainable transport in project evaluation. EURO J Decis Process 7(3):327–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnanavelbabu A, Arunagiri P (2018) Ranking of MUDA using AHP and Fuzzy AHP algorithm. Mater Today Proc 5(5–2):13406–13412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gu X, Zhu Q (2006) Fuzzy multi-attribute decision-making method based on eigenvector of fuzzy attribute evaluation space. Decis Support Syst 41(2):400–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güran A, Uysal M, Ekinci Y, Güran CB (2017) An additive FAHP based sentence score function for text summarization. Inf Technol Control 46(1):53–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Junior FRL, Osiro L, Carpinetti LCR (2014) A comparison between Fuzzy AHP and Fuzzy TOPSIS methods to supplier selection. Appl Soft Comput 21:194–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaewfak K, Huynh VN, Ammarapala V, Charoensiriwath C (2019) A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approach for selecting the multimodal freight transportation routes. In: International symposium on knowledge and systems sciences. Springer, Singapore, pp 28–46

  • Kubler S, Robert J, Derigent W, Voisin A, Le Traon Y (2016) A state-of the-art survey & testbed of fuzzy AHP (FAHP) applications. Expert Syst Appl 65:398–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lima-Junior FR, Carpinetti LCR (2020) Dealing with the problem of null weights and scores in Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. Soft Comput 24:9557–9573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ljubojević S, Pamučar D, Jovanović D, Vešović V (2019) Outsourcing transport service: a fuzzy multi-criteria methodology for provider selection based on comparison of the real and ideal parameters of providers. Oper Res 19:399–433

    Google Scholar 

  • López JCL, Carrillo PAÁ, Chavira DAG, Noriega JJS (2017) A web-based group decision support system for multicriteria ranking problems. Oper Res Int J 17(2):499–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pramono PP, Surjandari I, Laoh E (2019) Estimating customer segmentation based on customer lifetime value using two-stage clustering method. In: 2019 16th international conference on service systems and service management, pp 1–5

  • Promentilla MAB, Furuichi T, Ishii K, Tanikawa N (2008) A fuzzy analytic network process for multi-criteria evaluation of contaminated site remedial countermeasures. J Environ Manage 88(3):479–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1996) Decision making with dependence and feedback: the analytic network process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Satty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schito J, Jullier J, Raubal M (2019) A framework for integrating stakeholder preferences when deciding on power transmission line corridors. EURO J Decis Process 7(3–4):159–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirisawat P, Kiatcharoenpol T (2018) Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS approaches to prioritizing solutions for reverse logistics barriers. Comput Ind Eng 117:303–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Laarhoven PJM, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1–3):229–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang YC, Chen TCT (2019) A partial-consensus posterior-aggregation FAHP method—supplier selection problem as an example. Mathematics 7(2):179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Chu J, Wu J (2007) Selection of optimum maintenance strategies based on a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Int J Prod Econ 107(1):151–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedley WC (1993) Consistency prediction for incomplete AHP matrices. Math Comput Model 17(4–5):151–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng G, Zhu N, Tian Z, Chen Y, Sun B (2012) Application of a trapezoidal fuzzy AHP method for work safety evaluation and early warning rating of hot and humid environments. Saf Sci 50(2):228–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhü K (2014) Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: fallacy of the popular methods. Eur J Oper Res 236(1):209–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the valuable comments of the editor and reviewers for improving the quality of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan

    Toly Chen

Authors
  1. Toly Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toly Chen.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, T. Enhancing the efficiency and accuracy of existing FAHP decision-making methods. EURO J Decis Process 8, 177–204 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-020-00115-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-020-00115-8

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation