群AHP中基于距离的聚合

IF 2.8 Q2 OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE Journal of Decision Systems Pub Date : 2022-04-29 DOI:10.1080/12460125.2022.2070952
Zsombor Szádoczki, S. Duleba
{"title":"群AHP中基于距离的聚合","authors":"Zsombor Szádoczki, S. Duleba","doi":"10.1080/12460125.2022.2070952","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aggregation of evaluators’ preferences is a key problem in group decision making. We examine the recently proposed distance-based techniques and compare their efficiency to the traditional aggregation of individual preferences (AIP) methods in simulated Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) cases. We use the Kendall W statistic to measure the rank correlation among the individual priority vectors of the group and the common priority vector for the different aggregation approaches. Extensive simulations (altogether 88000 cases) show that both the Euclidean Distance-Based Aggregation Method (EDBAM) and the Aitchison Distance-Based Aggregation Method significantly outperform the traditional techniques in case of smaller and mid-sized priority vectors (at most six items to be compared). However, EDBAM outperform the AIP methods for all dimensions that is conventionally used in AHP, and its computation time is also low.","PeriodicalId":45565,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Decision Systems","volume":"31 1","pages":"98 - 106"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Distance-based aggregation in group AHP\",\"authors\":\"Zsombor Szádoczki, S. Duleba\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/12460125.2022.2070952\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The aggregation of evaluators’ preferences is a key problem in group decision making. We examine the recently proposed distance-based techniques and compare their efficiency to the traditional aggregation of individual preferences (AIP) methods in simulated Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) cases. We use the Kendall W statistic to measure the rank correlation among the individual priority vectors of the group and the common priority vector for the different aggregation approaches. Extensive simulations (altogether 88000 cases) show that both the Euclidean Distance-Based Aggregation Method (EDBAM) and the Aitchison Distance-Based Aggregation Method significantly outperform the traditional techniques in case of smaller and mid-sized priority vectors (at most six items to be compared). However, EDBAM outperform the AIP methods for all dimensions that is conventionally used in AHP, and its computation time is also low.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Decision Systems\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"98 - 106\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Decision Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2022.2070952\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Decision Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2022.2070952","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

评价者偏好的聚合是群体决策中的一个关键问题。我们研究了最近提出的基于距离的技术,并在模拟层次分析过程(AHP)的情况下将其与传统的个人偏好聚合(AIP)方法的效率进行了比较。我们使用Kendall W统计量来衡量组的单个优先向量和不同聚合方法的公共优先向量之间的等级相关性。广泛的模拟(总共88000个案例)表明,在较小和中等大小的优先向量(最多六个项目进行比较)的情况下,欧几里得基于距离的聚合方法(EDBAM)和艾奇逊基于距离的聚合方法都明显优于传统技术。然而,EDBAM在AHP中通常使用的所有维度上都优于AIP方法,而且它的计算时间也很低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Distance-based aggregation in group AHP
ABSTRACT The aggregation of evaluators’ preferences is a key problem in group decision making. We examine the recently proposed distance-based techniques and compare their efficiency to the traditional aggregation of individual preferences (AIP) methods in simulated Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) cases. We use the Kendall W statistic to measure the rank correlation among the individual priority vectors of the group and the common priority vector for the different aggregation approaches. Extensive simulations (altogether 88000 cases) show that both the Euclidean Distance-Based Aggregation Method (EDBAM) and the Aitchison Distance-Based Aggregation Method significantly outperform the traditional techniques in case of smaller and mid-sized priority vectors (at most six items to be compared). However, EDBAM outperform the AIP methods for all dimensions that is conventionally used in AHP, and its computation time is also low.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Decision Systems
Journal of Decision Systems OPERATIONS RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
23.50%
发文量
55
期刊最新文献
Public acceptance of smart home technologies in the UK: a citizens’ jury study Perceptions of facilitators towards adoption of AI-based solutions for sustainable agriculture I am therefore, I do: a fit perspective of decision-making styles and business intelligence usage AI: A knowledge sharing tool for improving employees’ performance Data-driven decision making in advanced manufacturing Systems: modeling and analysis of critical success factors
×
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