Transformation of numerical scales for pairwise comparisons: AHP, Dematel, BWM, SWARA

IF 0.4 Q4 MATHEMATICS, APPLIED Journal of Applied Mathematics & Informatics Pub Date : 2022-10-21 DOI:10.37791/2687-0649-2022-17-5-15-33
Irik Z. Mukhametzyanov
{"title":"Transformation of numerical scales for pairwise comparisons: AHP, Dematel, BWM, SWARA","authors":"Irik Z. Mukhametzyanov","doi":"10.37791/2687-0649-2022-17-5-15-33","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper presents an overview and comparative analysis of four weighting methods for multi-criteria decision-making problem based on pairwise comparisons: AHP, Dematel, BWM and SWARA. It is demonstrate, by examples that the reliability of evaluations largely depends on the correct use of the pairwise comparison tool: evaluations are given on a verbal scale, then converted into quantitative values and then the criteria priorities are calculated. All stages of pairwise comparisons are multivariate. In particular, the validity of this decision-making tool depends on the choice of numerical scale and the method of prioritization. Given the importance, a set of concepts relating to linguistic variables, linguistic pairwise comparison matrices, and numerical scale (scale function) are presented in detail. It is demonstrate that the information of the pairwise comparison matrix in AHP is higher and is sufficient for the unambiguous implementation of the Dematel, BWM and SWARA methods. Although the reliability of the solution for a larger number of input information is considered higher, nevertheless, it cannot be argued that the decision of the AHP are more significant. The emphasis in this study is on the transformation of the numerical scale. The transformation of the numerical scale a directly related to the mental representation of the verbal scale, since the decision maker forms the scale according to his mental representation. It is demonstrate that the compression of the numerical scale leads to the alignment of priorities. The trend is the same for all types of numerical scales and prioritization methods, but the process occurs at different speeds. For scales with a smaller number of gradations, a decrease in the degree of priority on the numerical scale is characteristic, which leads to a decrease in the difference in weights. In particular, this difference can be adjusted by scaling.","PeriodicalId":44195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Mathematics & Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Mathematics & Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37791/2687-0649-2022-17-5-15-33","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The paper presents an overview and comparative analysis of four weighting methods for multi-criteria decision-making problem based on pairwise comparisons: AHP, Dematel, BWM and SWARA. It is demonstrate, by examples that the reliability of evaluations largely depends on the correct use of the pairwise comparison tool: evaluations are given on a verbal scale, then converted into quantitative values and then the criteria priorities are calculated. All stages of pairwise comparisons are multivariate. In particular, the validity of this decision-making tool depends on the choice of numerical scale and the method of prioritization. Given the importance, a set of concepts relating to linguistic variables, linguistic pairwise comparison matrices, and numerical scale (scale function) are presented in detail. It is demonstrate that the information of the pairwise comparison matrix in AHP is higher and is sufficient for the unambiguous implementation of the Dematel, BWM and SWARA methods. Although the reliability of the solution for a larger number of input information is considered higher, nevertheless, it cannot be argued that the decision of the AHP are more significant. The emphasis in this study is on the transformation of the numerical scale. The transformation of the numerical scale a directly related to the mental representation of the verbal scale, since the decision maker forms the scale according to his mental representation. It is demonstrate that the compression of the numerical scale leads to the alignment of priorities. The trend is the same for all types of numerical scales and prioritization methods, but the process occurs at different speeds. For scales with a smaller number of gradations, a decrease in the degree of priority on the numerical scale is characteristic, which leads to a decrease in the difference in weights. In particular, this difference can be adjusted by scaling.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两两比较的数值尺度转换:AHP, Dematel, BWM, SWARA
本文综述并比较分析了基于两两比较的多准则决策问题的四种加权方法:AHP、Dematel、BWM和SWARA。通过实例表明,评价的可靠性在很大程度上取决于对两两比较工具的正确使用:评价是在口头尺度上给出的,然后转换为数量值,然后计算标准优先级。两两比较的所有阶段都是多元的。具体而言,该决策工具的有效性取决于数值尺度的选择和排序方法。鉴于其重要性,本文详细介绍了一组与语言变量、语言两两比较矩阵和数值尺度(尺度函数)相关的概念。结果表明,AHP中两两比较矩阵的信息量较高,足以保证Dematel、BWM和SWARA方法的明确实现。虽然对于大量的输入信息,解的可靠性被认为更高,但是不能认为AHP的决策更重要。本研究的重点是数值尺度的转换。数字量表的转换直接关系到言语量表的心理表征,因为决策者是根据他的心理表征来形成量表的。结果表明,数字尺度的压缩导致优先事项的对齐。对于所有类型的数值尺度和优先排序方法,趋势是相同的,但是这个过程以不同的速度发生。对于级数较少的比例尺,数字比例尺上的优先级降低是特征,这导致权重差减小。特别是,这种差异可以通过缩放来调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
User interface modeling for convolutional neural network for complex character recognition On segmentation of brain tumors by MRI images with deep learning methods Functional formation of a neuromorphic reservoir computational element based on a memristive metamaterial Fuzzy model of a multi-stage chemical-energy-technological processing system fine ore raw materials Computational concept for human food choice and eating behaviour
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1