Weight Uncertainties in AHP-OS

It is now possible, to analyse the weight uncertainties in your AHP-OS projects. When you view the results (View Result from the Project Administration Menu), you see the drop-down list for different AHP scales and a tick box var is shown.

Tick var and click on Scale. All priority vectors of your project will display the weight uncertainties with (+) and (-).

For example, “Capital” has a priority of 15.0% with an uncertainty 0f +1.7% and -2.1%.

The diagram for the total result will show in green the calculated priorities, in dark and light grey the possible plus and minus variations. 

Calculation is based on a randomised variation of all judgment inputs by +/- 0.5 on the 1 – 9 judgment scale. For more than 1 participant the variation is reduced by the square root of the number  of participants.

When downloading the results as csv file, uncertainties are listed below the group result.

 

Share on Facebook

Welcome to BPMSG – June 2017

Concepts, Methods and Tools to manage Business Performance

Dear Friends, dear Visitors,

over the last four months I put in a lot of effort to improve the AHP-OS online tool. With several releases a simplified menu structure and new features were introduced.

  • Delete individual participant’s inputs from an existing project.
  • Update a project hierarchy or project description, as long as there is no input.
  • Evaluate your AHP projects using different AHP judgment scales.
  • Analyse weight uncertainties based on small randomised variations of input judgments.

The last two features are based on my recent study about the comparisons of different AHP scales. Up to date there was no recommendation, what scales to use, and I found a new approach to analyse and compare the scales based on simple analytic functions. This study is submitted for publication, and I hope it will not take too long, until it is available. You can find some more information already in my posting here.

The feature of analysing weight uncertainties is an innovative way of doing sensitivity analysis: all judgments are randomly varied by ±0.5 on the judgment scale, and for each variation the maximum and minimum out coming priorities are captured. I use 1000 variations, enough to get a relatively stable margin of errors for each weight. It gives you information, how “precise” a weight or ranking is in your specific project.

Again, a big Thank You to all donors! Please note that the website is a non-commercial website for educational purposes. Your donation is used to cover running costs like web hosting, antispam services etc. PLEASE, help to support this website with a small donation. I spend a lot of time, sharing my knowledge for free. Thank you in advance!

For now, please enjoy your visit on the site and feel free to leave a comment – it is always appreciated.

Klaus D. Goepel,

Singapore, June 2017

BPMSG stands for Business Performance Management Singapore. As of now, it is a non-commercial website, and information is shared for educational purposes. Please see licensing conditions and terms of use.

Please give credit or a link to my site, if you use parts in your work, or make a small donation to support my effort to maintain this website.


Your Donation (1 Singapore Dollar is approx. 0.7 USD):



About the author

 

Share on Facebook

AHP Judgment Scales

The original AHP uses ratio scales. To derive priorities, verbal statements (comparisons) are converted into integers from 1 to 9. This “fundamental AHP scale” has been discussed, as there is no thoretical reason to be restricted to these numbers and verbal gradations. In the past several other numerical scales have been proposed [1],[3]. AHP-OS now supports nine different scales:

  1. Standard AHP linear scale
  2. Logarithmic scale
  3. Root square scale
  4. Inverse linear scale
  5. Balanced scale
  6. Balanced-n scale
  7. Adaptive-bal scale
  8. Power scale
  9. Geometric scale


Fig. 1 Mapping of the 1 to 9 input values to the elements of the decision matrix.

Power scale and geometric scale extend the values of matrix elements from 9 to 81 resp. 256. Root square and logarithmic scale reduce the values from 9 down to 3 resp 3.2. Inverse linear and balanced scale keep the values in the original range, but change the weight dispersion. The balanced-n scale is a corrected version of the original balanced scale. The adaptive-bal scale scales the values depending on the number of criteria: for n = 2 criteria it represents the balanced scale, for n = 10 criteria it represents a balanced power scale.

As a result, priority discrimination will be improved using the geometric or power scale, but at the same time the consistency ratio will go up. For the  logarithmic, root square, and inverse linear scales it is the opposite, priorities are more compressed or “equalised” across the criteria, see Fig. 2. At the same time CR improves.

Only the balanced-n scale and adaptive-bal scale will improve (or at least keep) the consistency ratio in a reasonable range and at the same time minimise weight uncertainties and weight dispersion.


Fig. 2 Change of priorities for different scales for an example with eight criteria.

The choice of the appropriate scale is difficult and an often discussed problem. Until today there is no published guideline, when to select which scale. A study on the impact on priorities and consistency ratio (CR) is published in [2]. I have just recently submitted a paper, providing a guideline on the selection of different AHP scales.

How to select different scales in AHP-OS

Open a project with completed judments (participants) from your project list. In the Project menu click on View Result. By default the results are then shown calculated based on the standard AHP 1 to 9 scale. To recalculate for different scales, select the scale in the Group Result menu from the scroll down list and click on Scale.

References

[1] Ishizaka A., Labib A. Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process, Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336 - 14345, (2011)

[2] Jiří Franeka, Aleš Krestaa. Judgment scales and consistency measure in AHP, Procedia Economics and Finance, 12, 164 - 173 (2014)

[3] W.W. Koczkodaj. Pairwise Comparison Rating Scale Paradox, Cornell University Library, (2015) https://arXiv.org/abs/1511.07540

Incoming search terms:

  • x rite singapore loc:SG
Share on Facebook

AHP-OS – Editing saved projects

In the project menu of the latest AHP-OS version (2017-05-25), I added a button to edit saved projects. As long as there are no participants’ inputs (completed pairwise comparisons), any saved project’s hierarchy, alternatives or description can be modified.

Open a project from your project list, and click on Edit Project. The project hierarchy page will open with a message on top , indicating that you are modifying an existong project. You can now change the hierarchy, for example add criteria or alternatives. A click on Save/Update in the Hierarchy Input Menu

will overwrite the data of the original project under the same session code. You will see it in a message . Before you click on Go to save,  you  can also update the project short description:

Difference between Use Hierarchy and Edit Project

With Use Hierarchy in the project administration menu, the hierarchy window will open, and you can also modify the hierarchy or alternatives. But in contrast to Edit the modified project will be saved as a new project under a new project session code.


Share on Facebook

AHP-OS New Release with simplified project administration

Based on feedback from users, I just released a major update of BPMSG’s AHP online software AHP-OS with simplified menu structure and additional functionality.  Starting the program as registered and logged-in user, the project session  table is displayed, showing your projects.

You can open one of your projects, either using a click on the session code in the project table, or selecting the session code from the session administration menu:

This will bring you to the project summary page, showing

  • Project data
  • Alternatives (if any)
  • Participants (if any)
  • Group input link (to be provided to your project participants)
  • Project Hierarchy and hiearchy definiton (text)

At the bottom you find the new project administration menu:

From here you can:

  • View Result: View the project group result (if there are already participants)
  • Group Input: Start pairwise comparisons
  • Use/Modify Hierarchy: use and modify the project’s hierarchy for a new project
  • Delete selected Participants (a request from many users)
  • Delete the whole project
  • Close the project to go back to the project session table

Due to this new Project Administration menu some of the other menus are simplified. Let me know your experience with the new structure or if you find any bugs. The manual will be updated within the next days.

Deleting participants

On the project summary page select the participants, you want to delete, and click on refresh.

You will then see a message Selected participant(s): Werner. Click on the button to delete the selected user(s). Careful: once deleted, they cannot be recovered and their pairwise comparison data will be lost.

 

Incoming search terms:

  • paperuri:(2f2ca361a5da31c6a7d3bc7b374f9304)
Share on Facebook

AHP-OS News March 2017

I received some feedback about session timeout and expired session errors. I have now extended the session timeout to 45 min. After 45 minutes of inactivity (no refresh of html pages, click on menu botton, etc.) the session expires and session data are lost. Kindly feedback, if you still face a problem.

AHP-OS can handle multibyte characters (Chinese, Korean, Japanese etc.) Unfortunately, the bar chart of priorities on the group result page cannot handle these characters; the annotation of the axis will not be readable. I am working on a solution.

When doing a pairwise comparison – leaving all comparisons at the default value of 1 (equal importance) – criteria will get equal priorities. I implemented a confirmation message box: Are you sure to leave all comparisons at equal importance?  This was done in order to avoid unintential submission of the default values.

Share on Facebook

AHP-OS and Farsi

Thanks to the feedback of a user from Iran, I found out that AHP-OS is working with RTL fonts like Farsi. It is important to add the semicolon to the right end of a node definition, and use latin punctuation marks, for example:

کاربری: مسکونی , تجاری , اداری ;

A simple decision hierarchy example looks like here:

farsi

Unfortunately, I am not able to check for a hierarchy with more than one level. If anyone could provide a 2 level hierarchy, I would appreciate. Arabic fonts should work too; kindly contact me, if you have an example.

 

Share on Facebook

AHP Online Software CSV Data Export

AHP-OS allows for downloading your project data as a comma separated value text file. The following menus include a csv download key:

  • Hierarchy Input Menu – download the AHP hierarchy
  • Group Result Menu – download resulting priorities and consolidated (aggregated) decision matrix
  • Project Data Menu – download decision matrices for all individual participants

Depending on your regional settings of your PC, for each download you can select the decimal point or decimal comma as decimal separator.

Text encoding of the CVS file is UTF-8. If you are using country specific characters and Windows Excel, you can convert from UTF-8 to ANSI. Open the CSV file with notepad, and save as a new file with Encoding set to ANSI.

 

Share on Facebook

AHP Online Software – Decision Matrices – Update 2016-11-02

With the latest update of my AHP-OS online software you can now view and download the decision matrices of all participant. The group result menu was extended by a selection View Input Data:

g-result-menu

From there you reach the Project Detailed Input page, which shows the decision matrix for each individual participant and all nodes of the hierarchy:

projectinputdata

The project data menu has the button to download the data in csv format:

p-data-menu

The csv file contains the basic project data – Session Code, Project Name, Project description, Author, Date, Type of evaluation, Number of Participants – as well as all input decision matrices sorted by participant and nodes (categories of the hierarchy) or criteria for alternative evaluation.

With the Back link you can go back to the Group Result Page.

Share on Facebook

AHP Online Software – Latest Update 2016-10-29

Based on the request from some users I have modified the result display of my AHP-OS online software. Beside the resulting priorities it is now possible to see the underlying consolidated decision matrix, which results from the aggregation of individual judgments (AIJ) using the geometric mean.

Decision Hierarchies

For decision hierarchies the result page shows the resulting local and global priorities (overall result) in hierarchical form, and the global priorities in descending order in a bar graph.

Then, in a breakdown by nodes, consolidated priorities, consolidated decision matrix and the priorities of individual participants are shown:

ahp-result
As in this example, the consolidated matrix for one participant is the same as the AHP decision matrix.

Alternative Evaluation

For alternative evaluation the breakdown is done by criteria. It shows the consolidated preferences for all alternatives with respect to each of the criteria:

ahp-result1

In this example the House A from the alternative houses A, B, C has the best match with respect to the criterion “Size”.

Outlook

I am now working on the extension to let you download the complete set of input values, i.e. all underlying decision matrices, to excel. In the current version only the resulting AHP priorities are available.

Share on Facebook