The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice

Forman, Ernest H.; Selly, Mary Ann

doi:10.1142/9789812810694_0004

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Step 5 Calculate the scores of each alternative according to Equation (27) and arrange them in descending order. The higher the score, the higher the priority.…”

Section: Ordering Points To Identify the Clustering Structure (Optics)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is no need to compare the evaluation criteria in pairs, and the weight depends on the mutual effects between different criteria, which can reduce the subjective impact of expert scoring to a certain extent [24]. Fuzzy logic formulated fuzzy function for each criterion in GIS [25], it can make up for the theoretical defects of ANP inheriting AHP, such as rank inversion problem, priority derivation method, and comparison scale [26,27]. Eghtesadifard et al (2020) [28] drew on DEMATEL-ANP and triangular fuzzy membership function to superposition 13 evaluation criteria layers to determine the optimal municipal solid waste landfill site.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coupling Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Clustering Algorithm for MSW Landfill Site Selection (Case Study: Lanzhou, China)

Liu

Xiao

et al. 2021

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The siting of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) landfills is a complex decision process. Existing siting methods utilize expert scores to determine criteria weights, however, they ignore the uncertainty of data and criterion weights and the efficacy of results. In this study, a coupled fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach was employed to site landfills in Lanzhou, a semi-arid valley basin city in China, to enhance the spatial decision-making process. Primarily, 21 criteria were identified in five groups through the Delphi method at 30 m resolution, then criteria weights were obtained by DEMATEL and ANP, and the optimal fuzzy membership function was determined for each evaluation criterion. Combined with GIS spatial analysis and the clustering algorithm, candidate sites that satisfied the landfill conditions were identified, and the spatial distribution characteristics were analyzed. These sites were subsequently ranked utilizing the MOORA, WASPAS, COPRAS, and TOPSIS methods to verify the reliability of the results by conducting sensitivity analysis. This study is different from the previous research that applied the MCDM approach in that fuzzy MCDM for weighting criteria is more reliable compared to the other common methods.

show abstract

“…Step 5 Calculate the scores of each alternative according to Equation (27) and arrange them in descending order. The higher the score, the higher the priority.…”

Section: Ordering Points To Identify the Clustering Structure (Optics)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coupling Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Clustering Algorithm for MSW Landfill Site Selection (Case Study: Lanzhou, China)

Liu

Xiao

et al. 2021

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A decision model for agile software release

Wang

Zou

2011

The Proceedings of 2011 9th International Conference on Reliability, Maintainability and Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multicriteria Decision Methods as an Alternative for Evaluating the UACh Research System

Santiago-Rodríguez¹,

Lozano

Portillo-Vázquez³

et al. 2015

EDU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research is a core university activity that contributes to the formation of critical thinking by students and teachers and promotes knowledge and scientific development that may help built better societies. The good performance of a university research system depends on, among other things, the ability to properly distribute the limited financial resources that are allocated to this activity. A common problem in grading activities usually considered in research is the integration of a long list of criteria and sub-criteria. The aim of this study was to determine how financial resources are distributed among all the research centers and institutes at the Universidad Autonoma Chapingo (UACh). Three methods were used for weighting criteria: simple ranking, point distribution and analytic hierarchy process. The aggregation of the values was carried out using TOPSIS and weighted sum methods and the resulting distributions were compared to the traditional way of distributing resources. It was concluded that although the differences were not significant, the TOSPIS method provides a more reliable allocation.

show abstract

The Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Coupling Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Clustering Algorithm for MSW Landfill Site Selection (Case Study: Lanzhou, China)

Coupling Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Clustering Algorithm for MSW Landfill Site Selection (Case Study: Lanzhou, China)

A decision model for agile software release

Multicriteria Decision Methods as an Alternative for Evaluating the UACh Research System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About