42
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Theoretical Paper

Numerical scaling of ratio scale utilities in multi-criteria decision analysis with geometric model

Pages 407-415 | Received 01 May 2005, Accepted 01 Oct 2006, Published online: 21 Dec 2017

References

  • AkarteMMSurendraNVRaviBRangarajNWeb based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy processJ Opl Res Soc20015251152210.1057/palgrave.jors.2601124
  • AlhoJMKangasJAnalyzing uncertainties in experts' opinions of forest plan performanceFor Sci199743521528
  • AlhoJMKolehmainenOLeskinenPRegression methods for pairwise comparisons dataThe Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making2001235251
  • Alho JM, Korhonen P and Leskinen P (2002). Measurement of preferences in multiple criteria evaluation. In: Pukkala T (ed). Multi-objective Forest Planning. Managing Forest Ecosystems, Vol. 6. Kluwer Academic Publishers: London, pp 21–36.
  • BeltonVGearTDiscussion: On the meaning of relative importanceJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal1997633533810.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199711)6:6<335::AID-MCDA168>3.0.CO;2-J
  • ChooEUSchonerBWedleyWCInterpretation of criteria weights in multicriteria decision makingComp Indust Engin19993752754110.1016/S0360-8352(00)00019-X
  • CrawfordGWilliamsCA note on the analysis of subjective judgment matricesJ Math Psy19852938740510.1016/0022-2496(85)90002-1
  • De JongPA statistical approach to Saaty's scaling method for prioritiesJ Math Psy19842846747810.1016/0022-2496(84)90013-0
  • HämäläinenRPSaloAARejoinder: The issue is understanding the weightsJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal1997634034310.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199711)6:6<340::AID-MCDA170>3.0.CO;2-7
  • HammondJSKeeneyRLRaiffaHSmart Choices. A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions1999
  • HuizinghEKREVrolijkHCJA comparison of verbal and numerical judgments in the analytic hierarchy processOrganiz Behav Human Decis Processes19977023724710.1006/obhd.1997.2708
  • KangasJMultiple-use planning of forest resources by using the Analytic Hierarchy ProcessScand J For Res1992725926810.1080/02827589209382718
  • Kangas J, Matero J and Pukkala T (1992). Analyyttisen hierarkiaprosessin käyttö metsien monikäytön suunnittelussa—tapaustutkimus (Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process in planning of multiple-use forestry—A case study. In Finnish.). Research Notes 412, Finnish Forest Research Institute.
  • KangasJStoreRLeskinenPMehtätaloLImproving the quality of landscape ecological forest planning by utilising advanced decision-support toolsFor Ecol Manag200013215717110.1016/S0378-1127(99)00221-2
  • KeeneyRLRaiffaHDecisions with Multiple Objectives. Preferences and Value Tradeoffs1993
  • Krantz DH, Luce RD, Suppes P and Tversky A (1971). Foundations of measurement. Additive and Polynomial Representations, Vol. 1. Academic Press: New York, USA.
  • LeskinenPMeasurement scales and scale independence in the Analytic Hierarchy ProcessJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal2000916317410.1002/1099-1360(200007)9:4<163::AID-MCDA274>3.0.CO;2-L
  • Leskinen P (2001). Statistical Methods for Measuring Preferences. Publications in Social Sciences, Vol. 48. University of Joensuu: Finland.
  • LeskinenPKangasJAnalysing uncertainties of interval judgment data in multiple-criteria evaluation of forest plansSilva Fenn19983236337210.14214/sf.677
  • LeskinenPKangasJRank reversals in multi-criteria decision analysis with statistical modelling of ratio-scale pairwise comparisonsJ Opl Res Soc20055685586110.1057/palgrave.jors.2601925
  • LeskinenPKangasASKangasJRank-based modelling of preferences in multi-criteria decision makingEur J Opl Res200415872173310.1016/S0377-2217(03)00384-9
  • LeskinenPKangasJPasanenA-MAssessing ecological values with dependent explanatory variables in multi-criteria forest ecosystem managementEcol Mod200317011210.1016/S0304-3800(03)00283-7
  • LootsmaFAScale sensitivity in the multiplicative AHP and SMARTJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal199328711010.1002/mcda.4020020205
  • Ma D and Zheng X (1991). 9/9–9/1 scale method of AHP. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on the AHP, Vol. I. University of Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh, PA, pp 197–202.
  • MilletIThe effectiveness of alternative preference elicitation methods in the Analytic Hierarchy ProcessJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal19976415110.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199701)6:1<41::AID-MCDA122>3.0.CO;2-D
  • MoshkovichHMMechitovAIOlsonDLOrdinal judgments in multiattribute decision analysisEur J Opl Res200213762564110.1016/S0377-2217(01)00106-0
  • PöyhönenMHämäläinenRPOn the convergence of multiattribute weighting methodsEur J Opl Res200112956958510.1016/S0377-2217(99)00467-1
  • PöyhönenMAHämäläinenRPSaloAAAn experiment on the numerical modelling of verbal ratio statementsJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal1997611010.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199701)6:1<1::AID-MCDA111>3.0.CO;2-W
  • SaatyTLA scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structuresJ Math Psy19771523428110.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5
  • SaatyTLThe Analytic Hierarchy Process. Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation1980
  • SaloAAHämäläinenRPOn the measurement of preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy ProcessJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal1997630931910.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199711)6:6<309::AID-MCDA163>3.0.CO;2-2
  • SchenkermanSUse and abuse of weights in multiple objective decision support modelsDecis Sci19912236937810.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb00352.x
  • SchonerBWedleyWCAmbiguous criteria weights in AHP: Consequences and solutionsDecis Sci19892046247510.1111/j.1540-5915.1989.tb01561.x
  • ShaDYCheZHSupply chain network design: Partner selection and production/distribution planning using a systematic modelJ Opl Res Soc200657526210.1057/palgrave.jors.2601949
  • TavanaMA priority assessment multi-criteria decision model for human spaceflight mission planning at NASAJ Opl Res Soc2006571197121510.1057/palgrave.jors.2602107
  • Von WinterfeldtDEdwardsWDecision Analysis and Behavioral Research1986
  • WeberMDiscussion: Remarks on the paper ‘On the measurement of preferences in the Analytic Hierarchy Process' by AA Salo and RP HämäläinenJ Multi-Crit Decis Anal1997632032110.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199711)6:6<320::AID-MCDA164>3.0.CO;2-2
  • YueJChenBWangM-CGenerating ranking groups in the analytical hierarchy processJ Opl Res Soc20065719020110.1057/palgrave.jors.2601975

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.