Analytical Study of AHP and Fuzzy AHP Techniques
Amit Mishra, and Sanjay Kumar Dubey
—Decision making is a comprehensive approach that involves selecting from several wide-ranging alternatives.Different analysis tools can be used in order to make decisions and solve problems in situations involving quantitative variablesand small number of criteria. However, many times beside the measurable variables, there exist qualitative variables, or peopleare supposed to prefer the best among the many choices, thus, an analytical way to make a successful decision is needed.Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the best ways for deciding among the complex criteria structure in different levels.Fuzzy AHP is a synthetic extension of classical AHP method when the fuzziness of the decision makers is considered. The mainaim of this paper is to provide a detailed analytical comparison of classical AHP and fuzzy AHP.
—AHP, FAHP, MCDM, FMADM
Eall makedecisions all the time consciously andunconsciously. The information we gather is tohelp us understand occurrences, in order to devel-op good judgments to make decisions about these occur-rences. Human lives are the sum of their decisions-whether in business or in personal spheres. In daily lives,people often have to make decisions
decision ismade” is important as “
decided”. Deciding tooquickly can be hazardous; delaying too long can meanmissed opportunities. In the end, it is crucial that peoplemake up their mind. To make a decision we need to knowthe problem, the need and purpose of the decision, thecriteria of the decision, their sub criteria, stakeholders andgroups affected and the alternative actions to take. Wethen try to determine the best alternative, or in the case ofresource allocation, we need priorities for the alternativesto allocate their appropriate share of the resources. Whatpeople need is a systematic and comprehensive approachto decision making . In such cases,Multi Criteria De-cision Making (MCDM) is required.MCDM is one of the most important fields of operationsresearch and deals with the problems that involve multi-ple and conflicting objectives. It is obvious that whenmore than objective exists in the problem, making a deci-sion becomes more complex. MCDM is both an approachand a set of techniques, with the aim of providing anoverall ordering of options, from the most preferred tothe least preferred option (The London School of Econom-ics and Political Science, 2007). MCDM approaches pro-vide a systematic procedure to help decision makerschoose the most desirable and satisfactory alternativeunder uncertain situationY.K. Cheng.Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is widely used for mul-ti-criteria decision making and has successfully been ap-plied to many practical decision-making problems. AHP,was proposed by T. L. Saaty, is a method for compli-cated and unstructured problems and also it is an ap-proach that uses a hierarchical model having levels ofgoal, criteria, possible sub-criteria, and alternatives. TheAHP, can be stated, a decision –making and estimationmethod which gives the percentage distribution of deci-sion points according to factors affecting decision, that isused if there is a defined decision hierarchy.With AHP,the decision maker selects the alternative that best meetshis or her decision criteria developing a numerical scoreto rank each decision alternative based on how well eachalternative meets them.In spite of its popularity, thismethod is often criticized for its inability to adequatelyhandle the inherent uncertainty and imprecision associat-ed with the mapping of the decision maker’s perceptionto exact numbers.In the traditional formulation of the AHP, human’s judg-ments are represented as exact(or
, according to thefuzzylogic terminology) numbers. However, in manypractical cases the human preference model is uncertainand decision-makers might be reluctant or unable to as-sign exact numerical values to the comparison judgments.For instance, when evaluating different services, the deci-sion-makers are usually unsure in their level of preferencedue to incomplete and uncertain information about pos-sible service providers and their performance. Since someof the service evaluation criteria are subjective and quali-tative, it is very difficult for the decision-maker to expressthe strength of his preferences and to provide exact pairwise comparison judgments. A natural way to cope withsuch uncertain judgments is to express the comparisonratios as fuzzy sets or fuzzy numbers, which incorporatethe vagueness of the human thinking.
Amit Mishra iswithAmity UniversityUttar Pradesh, NOIDA,India,201303.
Sanjay Kumar Dubey is with Amity University Uttar Pradesh, NOIDA,India,201303.
JOURNAL OF COMPUTING, VOLUME 5, ISSUE 3, MARCH 2013, ISSN (Online) 2151-9617https://sites.google.com/site/journalofcomputingWWW.JOURNALOFCOMPUTING.ORG30