Analytical Hierarchy Proccess (Ahp) : - Alternative Solution - Structuring - Alternative Selection

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 14

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCCESS (AHP)

- ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION
- STRUCTURING
- ALTERNATIVE SELECTION

Department of Industrial Engineering


Faculty of Engineering
University of Surabaya
Review week 2

Weighting Pairwise
Consistency
Method Comparison

TODAY’S TOPICS

1. Practice
2. Alternative Solution
3. Structuring Alternative-Criteria-Goal
4. Alternative Selection
5. Expert Choice
Practice
• Describe your own MCDM problem!
• Identify your goal and criteria!
• Using pair wise comparison, weight your criteria!
• Check your consistency in doing pair wise
comparison!
• If your pair wise comparison will be assessed not
consistent, then re-assess your preference of
criteria!
Alternative Solution
• Alternative solution is kind of choices to solve the
problem
• In our complex world system, we are forced to cope with
more problems than we have the resources to handle.
– What we need is not a more complicated way of thinking but
a framework that will enable us to think of complex problems
in a simple way.

 The AHP provides such a framework that enables us to make


effective decisions on complex issues by simplifying and
expediting our natural decision-making processes.
Alternative Solution
• Humans are not often logical creatures.
– Most of the time we base our judgments on
hazy impressions of reality and then use logic to
defend our conclusions.

The AHP organizes feelings, intuition, and logic


in a structured approach to decision making.
Analytical Hierarchy Process
• The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was developed by
Thomas L. Saaty.
– Saaty, T.L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1980

• The AHP is designed to solve complex problems


involving multiple criteria.

• An advantage of the AHP is that it is designed to handle


situations in which the subjective judgments of
individuals constitute an important part of the decision
process.
Analytical Hierarchy Process
• Basically the AHP is a method of (1) breaking down a
complex, unstructured situation into its component
parts; (2) arranging these parts, or variables into a
hierarchic order; (3) assigning numerical values to
subjective judgments on the relative importance of
each variable; and (4) synthesizing the judgments to
determine which variables have the highest priority
and should be acted upon to influence the outcome
of the situation.
Analytical Hierarchy Process
Three key steps of the AHP:
1. Decomposing the problem into a hierarchy – one
overall goal on the top level, several decision
alternatives on the bottom level and several criteria
contributing to the goal

2. Comparing pairs of alternatives with respect to each


criterion and pairs of criteria with respect to the
achievement of the overall goal

3. Synthesising judgements and obtaining priority


rankings of the alternatives with respect to each
criterion and the overall priority ranking for the problem
Stucturing Alternative-Criteria-Goal
Structuring a hierarchy:

Selecting goal
best Location

Costs Market Transport criteria

inital costs of
costs energy subcriteria

Berlin Frankfurt alternatives


Pairwise Comparison Matrix
Pairwise comparisons:

to A1 A2 A3

Alternative 1 (A1) a11 a12 a13


Alternative 2 (A2) a21 a22 a32 Pairwise Comparison Matrix A = ( aij )
Alternative 3 (A3) a31 a32 a33

Values for aij :


Verbal judgement of
Numerical values
preferences
1 equally important
2,4,6,8 => intermediate
3 weakly more important values
5 strongly more important
7 very strongly more important
reciprocals => reverse
comparisons
9 absolutely more important
Pairwise Comparison Matrix
For all i and j it is necessary that:

(a) aii = 1 A comparison of criterion i with itself:


equally important

(b) aij = 1/ aji aji are reverse comparisons and must be the
reciprocals of aij

costs market transport


Pairwise
costs 1 1/2 1/3
comparisons of the
criteria: market 2 1 1/3
transport 3 3 1
Pairwise Comparisons Matrix
costs Berlin Frankfurt
Pairwise comparisons matrix with
Berlin 1 2
respect to criterion costs:
Frankfurt 1/2 1

market Berlin Frankfurt


Pairwise comparisons matrix with
respect to criterion market: Berlin 1 1/4
Frankfurt 4 1

transport Berlin Frankfurt


Pairwise comparisons matrix with
Berlin 1 1/2
respect to criterion transport:
Frankfurt 2 1
Alternative Selection
• The overall priority of an alternative is computed by mul-
tiplying its priorities w.r.t each criterion with the priority of the
corresponding criterion and summing up the numbers:
Priority Alternative i =
 (Priority Alternative i w.r.t. Criterion j)*
*(Priority Criterion j)
• Priority(Berlin)=0.67*0.16+0.20*0.25+0.33*0.59=0.35.
Priority(Frankfurt)=0.65, thus Frankfurt should be selected.
Criteria Overall
Costs Market Transport
0.16 0.25 0.59
Berlin 0.67 0.20 0.33 0.35
Frankfurt 0.33 0.80 0.67 0.65
THANK YOU…

0 0
C E 20
C H OI
P E RT
Y E X
TR
E T ’S
L

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy