Measuring consistency and inconsistency of pair comparison systems

Jaroslav Ramík; Milan Vlach

Kybernetika (2013)

  • Volume: 49, Issue: 3, page 465-486
  • ISSN: 0023-5954

Abstract

top
In this paper we deal with mathematical modeling of real processes that are based on preference relations in the sense that, for every pair of distinct alternatives, the processes are linked to a value of preference degree of one alternative over the other one. The use of preference relations is usual in decision making, psychology, economics, knowledge acquisition techniques for knowledge-based systems, social choice and many other social sciences. For designing useful mathematical models of such processes, it is very important to adequately represent properties of preference relations. We are mainly interested in the properties of such representations which are usually called reciprocity, consistency and transitivity. In decision making processes, the lack of reciprocity, consistency or transitivity may result in wrong conclusions. That is why it is so important to study the conditions under which these properties are satisfied. However, the perfect consistency or transitivity is difficult to obtain in practice, particularly when evaluating preferences on a set with a large number of alternatives. Under different preference representation structures, the multiplicative and additive preference representations are incorporated in the decision problem by means of a transformation function between multiplicative and additive representations. Some theoretical results on relationships between multiplicative and additive representations of preferences on finite sets are presented and some possibilities of measuring their consistency or transitivity are proposed and discussed. Illustrative numerical examples are provided.

How to cite

top

Ramík, Jaroslav, and Vlach, Milan. "Measuring consistency and inconsistency of pair comparison systems." Kybernetika 49.3 (2013): 465-486. <http://eudml.org/doc/260576>.

@article{Ramík2013,
abstract = {In this paper we deal with mathematical modeling of real processes that are based on preference relations in the sense that, for every pair of distinct alternatives, the processes are linked to a value of preference degree of one alternative over the other one. The use of preference relations is usual in decision making, psychology, economics, knowledge acquisition techniques for knowledge-based systems, social choice and many other social sciences. For designing useful mathematical models of such processes, it is very important to adequately represent properties of preference relations. We are mainly interested in the properties of such representations which are usually called reciprocity, consistency and transitivity. In decision making processes, the lack of reciprocity, consistency or transitivity may result in wrong conclusions. That is why it is so important to study the conditions under which these properties are satisfied. However, the perfect consistency or transitivity is difficult to obtain in practice, particularly when evaluating preferences on a set with a large number of alternatives. Under different preference representation structures, the multiplicative and additive preference representations are incorporated in the decision problem by means of a transformation function between multiplicative and additive representations. Some theoretical results on relationships between multiplicative and additive representations of preferences on finite sets are presented and some possibilities of measuring their consistency or transitivity are proposed and discussed. Illustrative numerical examples are provided.},
author = {Ramík, Jaroslav, Vlach, Milan},
journal = {Kybernetika},
keywords = {multi-criteria optimization; pair-wise comparison matrix; AHP; multi-criteria optimization; pair-wise comparison matrix; AHP},
language = {eng},
number = {3},
pages = {465-486},
publisher = {Institute of Information Theory and Automation AS CR},
title = {Measuring consistency and inconsistency of pair comparison systems},
url = {http://eudml.org/doc/260576},
volume = {49},
year = {2013},
}

TY - JOUR
AU - Ramík, Jaroslav
AU - Vlach, Milan
TI - Measuring consistency and inconsistency of pair comparison systems
JO - Kybernetika
PY - 2013
PB - Institute of Information Theory and Automation AS CR
VL - 49
IS - 3
SP - 465
EP - 486
AB - In this paper we deal with mathematical modeling of real processes that are based on preference relations in the sense that, for every pair of distinct alternatives, the processes are linked to a value of preference degree of one alternative over the other one. The use of preference relations is usual in decision making, psychology, economics, knowledge acquisition techniques for knowledge-based systems, social choice and many other social sciences. For designing useful mathematical models of such processes, it is very important to adequately represent properties of preference relations. We are mainly interested in the properties of such representations which are usually called reciprocity, consistency and transitivity. In decision making processes, the lack of reciprocity, consistency or transitivity may result in wrong conclusions. That is why it is so important to study the conditions under which these properties are satisfied. However, the perfect consistency or transitivity is difficult to obtain in practice, particularly when evaluating preferences on a set with a large number of alternatives. Under different preference representation structures, the multiplicative and additive preference representations are incorporated in the decision problem by means of a transformation function between multiplicative and additive representations. Some theoretical results on relationships between multiplicative and additive representations of preferences on finite sets are presented and some possibilities of measuring their consistency or transitivity are proposed and discussed. Illustrative numerical examples are provided.
LA - eng
KW - multi-criteria optimization; pair-wise comparison matrix; AHP; multi-criteria optimization; pair-wise comparison matrix; AHP
UR - http://eudml.org/doc/260576
ER -

References

top
  1. Aguarón, J., Moreno-Jimenéz, J. M., 10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00255-2, European J. Oper. Res. 147 (2003), 137-145. Zbl1060.90657DOI10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00255-2
  2. Boyd, J. P., Numerical methods for Bayesian ratings from paired comparisons., J. Quantitative Anthropology 3 (1991), 117-133. 
  3. Bozóki, S., Rapcsák, T., On Saaty's and Koczkodaj's inconsistencies of pairwise comparison matrices., WP 2007-1, June 2007, Computer and Automation Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, http://www.oplab.sztaki.hu/WP_2007_1_Bozoki_Rapcsak.pdf Zbl1177.90205
  4. Brin, S., Page, L., 10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X, Comput. Networks and ISDN Systems 30 (1998), 107-117. DOI10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X
  5. Crawford, G., Williams, C., 10.1016/0022-2496(85)90002-1, J. Math. Psychol. 29 (1985), 387-405. DOI10.1016/0022-2496(85)90002-1
  6. Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Integrating three representation models in fuzzy multipur-pose decision making nased on fuzzy preference relations., Fuzzy Sets and Systems 97 (1998), 33-48. MR1618276
  7. Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Integrating multiplicative preference relations in a multipur-pose decision making model based on fuzzy preference relations., Fuzzy Sets and Systems 112 (2001), 277-291. MR1854819
  8. Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.08.032, European J. Oper. Res. 182 (2007), 383-399. DOI10.1016/j.ejor.2006.08.032
  9. Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., 10.1109/TSMCB.2009.2023923, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics 39 (2009), 6, 1628-1633. DOI10.1109/TSMCB.2009.2023923
  10. Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., Herrera, F., 10.1109/TFUZZ.2008.2008028, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Systems 17 (2009), 1, 14-23. DOI10.1109/TFUZZ.2008.2008028
  11. Dopazo, E., Gonzales-Pachón, J., Consistency-driven approximation of a pairwise comparison matrix., Kybernetika 39 (2003), 5, 561-568. MR2042341
  12. Fiedler, M., Nedoma, J., Ramík, J., Rohn, J., Zimmermann, K., Linear Optimization Problems with Inexact Data., Springer, Berlin - Heidelberg - New York - Hong Kong - London - Milan - Tokyo 2006. Zbl1106.90051MR2218777
  13. Fishburn, P. C., Utility Theory for Decision Making., Wiley, New York 1970. Zbl0213.46202MR0264810
  14. Fishburn, P. C., 10.1016/0022-2496(73)90021-7, J. Math. Psychol. 10 (1973), 329-352. Zbl0277.92008MR0327330DOI10.1016/0022-2496(73)90021-7
  15. Fodor, J., Roubens, M., Fuzzy Preference Modelling and Multicriteria Decision Support., Kluwer, Dordrecht 1994. Zbl0827.90002
  16. Gass, S. I., Rapcsák, T., 10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00755-5, European J. Oper. Res. 154 (2004), 573-584. Zbl1146.90445MR2025802DOI10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00755-5
  17. Golany, B., 10.1016/0377-2217(93)90165-J, European J. Oper. Res. 69 (1993), 210-220. DOI10.1016/0377-2217(93)90165-J
  18. Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F., Luque, M., 10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00725-7, European J. Oper. Res. 154 (2004), 98-109. Zbl1099.91508MR2025664DOI10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00725-7
  19. Herrera-Viedma, E., Chiclana, F., Herrera, F., Alonso, S., 10.1109/TSMCB.2006.875872, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B - Cybernetics 37 (2007), 1, 176-189. DOI10.1109/TSMCB.2006.875872
  20. Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., Tversky, A., Foundations of Measurement. Vol. I., Academic Press, New York 1971. Zbl1118.91359MR0459067
  21. Mareš, M., Coalitional fuzzy preferences., Kybernetika 38 (2002), 3, 339-352. Zbl1265.91012MR1944314
  22. Mareš, M., Fuzzy coalitional structures., Fuzzy Sets and Systems 114 (2000), 3, 23-33. Zbl1153.91325
  23. Ramík, J., Korviny, P., Inconsistency of pairwise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements based on geo-metric mean., Fuzzy Sets and Systems 161 (2010), 1604-1613. MR2608264
  24. Ramík, J., Vlach, M., Generalized Concavity in Optimization and Decision Making., Kluwer Publ. Comp., Boston - Dordrecht - London, 2001. 
  25. Roberts, F. S., Measurement theory: with application to decisionmaking, utility and the social sciences., In: Encyklopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 7, Addison-Wesley, Reading 1979. MR0551364
  26. Saaty, T. L., Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the AHP., RWS Publications, Pittsburgh 1994. 
  27. Saaty, T. L., Multicriteria Decision Making - The Analytical Hierarchy Process. Vol. I., RWS Publications, Pittsburgh 1991. 
  28. Stein, W. E., Mizzi, P. J., 10.1016/j.ejor.2005.10.057, European J. Oper. Res. 117 (2007), 488-497. Zbl1111.90057DOI10.1016/j.ejor.2005.10.057
  29. Tanino, T., 10.1016/0165-0114(84)90032-0, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 12 (1984), 117-131. Zbl0567.90002MR0734944DOI10.1016/0165-0114(84)90032-0
  30. Tanino, T., Fuzzy preference relations in group decision making., In: Non-Conventional Preference Relations in Decision Making (J. Kacprzyk and M. Roubens, eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1988, pp. 54-71. Zbl0652.90010MR1133648

NotesEmbed ?

top

You must be logged in to post comments.

To embed these notes on your page include the following JavaScript code on your page where you want the notes to appear.

Only the controls for the widget will be shown in your chosen language. Notes will be shown in their authored language.

Tells the widget how many notes to show per page. You can cycle through additional notes using the next and previous controls.

    
                

                
Note: Best practice suggests putting the JavaScript code just before the closing </body> tag.