Advertisement

On pairwise comparison matrices that can be made consistent by the modification of a few elements

  • Sándor Bozóki
  • János FülöpEmail author
  • Attila Poesz
Original Paper

Abstract

Pairwise comparison matrices are often used in Multi-attribute Decision Making for weighting the attributes or for the evaluation of the alternatives with respect to a criteria. Matrices provided by the decision makers are rarely consistent and it is important to index the degree of inconsistency. In the paper, the minimal number of matrix elements by the modification of which the pairwise comparison matrix can be made consistent is examined. From practical point of view, the modification of 1, 2, or, for larger matrices, 3 elements seems to be relevant. These cases are characterized by using the graph representation of the matrices. Empirical examples illustrate that pairwise comparison matrices that can be made consistent by the modification of a few elements are present in the applications.

Keywords

Multi-attribute decision making Consistent pairwise comparison matrix Graph representation of pairwise comparison matrices Empirical pairwise comparison matrix 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bozóki S, Lewis R (2005) Solving the least squares method problem in the AHP for 3 × 3 and 4 × 4 matrices. Central Eur J Oper Res 13: 255–270Google Scholar
  2. Bozóki S, Rapcsák T (2008) On Saaty′s and Koczkodaj′s inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices. J Glob Optim 42(2): 139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bozóki S (2008) Solution of the least squares method problem of pairwise comparisons matrices. Central Eur J Oper Res 16: 345–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chu ATW, Kalaba RE, Spingarn K (1979) A comparison of two methods for determining the weight belonging to fuzzy sets. J Optim Theory Appl 4: 531–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gass SI (1998) Tournaments, transitivity and pairwise comparison matrices. J Oper Res Soc 49: 616–624Google Scholar
  6. Gass SI, Standard SM (2002) Characteristics of positive reciprocal matrices in the analytic hierarchy process. J Oper Res Soc 53: 1385–1389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kéri G (2005) Criteria for pairwise comparison matrices. Szigma 36: 139–148 (in Hungarian)Google Scholar
  8. Koczkodaj WW (1993) A new definition of consistency of pairwise comparisons. Math Comput Model 18: 79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Poesz A (2008) Analysis of the inconsistency of empirical pairwise comparison matrices. Master’s Thesis, Department of Decisions in Economics, Corvinus University of BudapestGoogle Scholar
  10. Poesz A (2009) Empirical pairwise comparison matrices (EPCM)—an on-line collection from real decisions, version EPCM-October-2009. http://www.uni-corvinus.hu/index.php?id=29191; http://www.sztaki.hu/~bozoki/epcm
  11. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New-YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Standard SM (2000) Analysis of positive reciprocal matrices. Master’s Thesis, Graduate School of the University of MarylandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sándor Bozóki
    • 1
    • 2
  • János Fülöp
    • 1
    Email author
  • Attila Poesz
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory on Engineering and Management IntelligenceResearch Group of Operations Research and Decision Systems, Computer and Automation Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of SciencesBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Department of Operations ResearchCorvinus University of BudapestBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations