When designing an ANP model it is important to acknowledge and properly address whether the elements in the model are dependent on or independent of each other. The decision maker must perform criteria cluster weighting comparisons individually for the criteria clusters in each column of the Supermatrix to correctly model when the criteria and alternatives are dependent on one another to accurately capture the dependence. Failing to recognize that the criteria in a criteria cluster in one column of the Supermatrix is not necessarily equal in weight to the criteria in that same criteria cluster but in another column can lead to misrepresented rankings in the final priorities. In the extreme case, it can remove all dependence from an ANP model. Two models are used to demonstrate this unintended effect on the final priorities, and also demonstrate a crucial contribution that this effect is independent of the tangibility of the criteria considered. In the third model, the solution is discussed and implemented. A proof is provided in the appendix. This criteria cluster weighting approach further extends the applicability of the ANP to additional decisions when a decision maker wishes to represent a fully-dependent ANP decision.
Dependence, intangible elements, criteria weights
Belton, V., & Gear, T. (1983). On a short-coming of Saaty's method of analytic hierarchies. Omega, 11(3), 228-230. Doi: 10.1016/0305-0483(83)90047-6
Choo, E. U., Schoner, B., & Wedley, W. C. (1999). Interpretation of criteria weights in multicriteria decision making. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 37(3), 527-541. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(00)00019-X
Dyer, (1990). Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 36(3), 249-258. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.249
Dyer, J. W. R. E. (1985). A critique of the analytic hierarchy process. Technical Report, 84/85-4-24, (Department of Management, The University of Texas at Austin).
Harker, P. T. (1987). Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process. Mathematical Modelling, 9(11), 837-848. Doi: 10.1016/0270-0255(87)90503-3
Harker, P. T., & Vargas, L. G. (1990). Reply to "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process" by Dyer. Management Science, 36(3), 269-273. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.269
Hefnaway, A. E. & Mohammed, A. S. (2014). Review of different methods for deriving weights in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 6(1), 92-123. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v6i1.226
Lipovetsky S., (2011) Priority eigenvectors in Analytic Hierarchy/Network Processes with outer dependence between alternatives and criteria, International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 3(2), 172-179. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v3i2.123
Lipovetsky, S. (2011). An interpretation of the AHP global priority as the eigenvector solution of an ANP supermatrix. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 3(1), 70-78. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v3i1.90
Lipovetsky S., (2013). Supermatrix eigenproblem and interpretation of priority vectors in Analytic Network Process., International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 5 (1), 105-113. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v5i1.132
Lipovetsky, S. & Conklin W. (2015). AHP priorities and the Markov-Chapman-Kolmogorov steady-states probabilities. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 7(2), 349-363. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v7i2.243
Saaty (1977a). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of mathematical psychology, 15(3), 234-281. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
Saaty (1977b). The Sudan Transport Study. Interfaces, 8(1), 37-57. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.8.1pt2.37
Saaty (1986). Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science, 32(7), 841-855. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.7.841
Saaty (1990). An exposition on the AHP in reply to the paper "Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process". Management Science, 36(3), 259-268. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.3.259
Saaty (1996). The Analytical Hierarchy Process (2nd ed. Vol. 1). Pittsburgh: RWS Publications. Doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-032599-6.50008-8
Saaty (1996) Decision making with dependence and feedback: The Analytic Network Process. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications. Doi: 10.4018/978-1-59140-702-7.ch018
Saaty (2005). Theory and applications of the Analytic Network Process: Decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications. Doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_4
Saaty (2008a). The analytic hierarchy and analytic network measurement processes: Applications to decisions under risk. European Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics,1,122-196.
Saaty, (2008b). Relative measurement and its generalization in decision making â€“ why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of intangible factors: The Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process, RACSAM, 102, 251â€“318. Doi: 10.1007/BF03191825
Saaty (2011). Aligning the measurment of tangibles with intagibles and not the converse. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 3(1),79-87. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v3i1.91
Saaty & Cillo, B. (2008). The Encyclicon: A Dictionary of complex decisions using the Analytical Network Process (Vol. 2). Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications. Doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-7279-7_1
Saaty & Vargas, (2006). Decision making with the analytic network process: Economic, political, social and technological applications with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks (Vol. 95). Springer.
Saaty (2016). Five wasy to combine tangibles with intangibles. International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 8(2), 372-381. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v8i2.395
Schoner, B., Wedley, W. C., & Choo, E. U. (1993). A unified approach to AHP with linking pins. European Journal of Operational Research, 64(3), 384-392. . Doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(93)90128-A.
Wallenius, J., Dyer, Fishburn, P. C., Steuer, R. E., Zionts, S., & Deb, K. (2008). Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Management Science, 54(7), 1336-1349. Doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0838
Wedley, W. C. (2013). AHP/ANP before, present and beyond. Paper presented at the ISAHP 201, Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia.
Wedley, W. C., & Choo, E. U. (2001). A unit interpretation of multi-criteria ratios. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Berne, Switzerland.
Wedley, W. C., & Choo, E. U. (2011). Multiâ€Criteria ratios: What is the unit? Journal of Multiâ€Criteria Decision Analysis, 18(3-4), 161-171. Doi: 10.1002/mcda.463
Zahedi, F. (1986). The analytic hierarchy processâ€”a survey of the method and its applications. interfaces, 16(4), 96-108. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.16.4.96
Zahir, S. (2007). A new approach to understanding and finding remedy for rank reversals in the additive Analytic Hierarchy Process. Paper presented at the Administrative Sciences Association of Canada (ASAC).
Copyright of all articles published in IJAHP is transferred to Creative Decisions Foundation (CDF). However, the author(s) reserve the following:
- All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
- The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain permission from CDF as well. However, CDF may grant rights with respect to journal issues as a whole.
- The right to use all or parts of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, textbooks, or reprint books.
- The authors affirm that the article has been neither copyrighted nor published, that it is not being submitted for publication elsewhere, and that if the work is officially sponsored, it has been released for open publication.
The only exception to the statements in the paragraph above is the following: If an article published in IJAHP contains copyrighted material, such as a teaching case, as an appendix, then the copyright (and all commercial rights) of such material remains with the original copyright holder.
CDF will receive permission for publication of copyrighted material in IJAHP. This permission is not transferable to third parties. Permission to make electronic and paper copies of part or all of the articles, including all computer files that are linked to the articles, for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage.
This permission does not apply to previously copyrighted material, such as teaching cases. In paper copies of the article, the copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date should be visible. To copy otherwise is permitted provided that a per-copy fee is paid.
To republish, to post on servers, or redistribute to lists requires that you post a link to the IJAHP article, which is available in open access delivery mode. Do not upload the article itself.
Authors are permitted to present a talk, based on a paper submitted to or accepted by IJAHP, at a conference where the paper would not be published in a copyrighted publication either before or after the conference and where the author did not assign copyright to the conference or related publisher.