Geodesic
Scales and their properties
News of the Kabardin-Balkar scientific center of RAS, no. 5 (2010), pp. 15-23.

Voir la notice de l'article provenant de la source Math-Net.Ru

The work investigates a widely-used decision making method, the analytic hierarchy process, from the aspect of scale validity. A new scale based on the logistic equation, which is obtained from some common criteria and practice, is suggested. Parameterization of scales is introduced and the properties of parameters are investigated. As the statistical results show, the logistic scale is more advantageous in quite a number of cases.
Keywords: decision making, analytic hierarchy process, priorities arrangement method, logistic curve.
Mots-clés : scales 
@article{IZKAB_2010_5_a1,
     author = {V. T. Kusherbaeva and Yu. A. Sushkov},
     title = {Scales and their properties},
     journal = {News of the Kabardin-Balkar scientific center of RAS},
     pages = {15--23},
     publisher = {mathdoc},
     number = {5},
     year = {2010},
     language = {ru},
     url = {http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/IZKAB_2010_5_a1/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - V. T. Kusherbaeva
AU  - Yu. A. Sushkov
TI  - Scales and their properties
JO  - News of the Kabardin-Balkar scientific center of RAS
PY  - 2010
SP  - 15
EP  - 23
IS  - 5
PB  - mathdoc
UR  - http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/IZKAB_2010_5_a1/
LA  - ru
ID  - IZKAB_2010_5_a1
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A V. T. Kusherbaeva
%A Yu. A. Sushkov
%T Scales and their properties
%J News of the Kabardin-Balkar scientific center of RAS
%D 2010
%P 15-23
%N 5
%I mathdoc
%U http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/IZKAB_2010_5_a1/
%G ru
%F IZKAB_2010_5_a1
V. T. Kusherbaeva; Yu. A. Sushkov. Scales and their properties. News of the Kabardin-Balkar scientific center of RAS, no. 5 (2010), pp. 15-23. http://geodesic.mathdoc.fr/item/IZKAB_2010_5_a1/

[1] T. Saati, Prinyatie reshenii. Metod analiza ierarkhii, Radio i svyaz, M., 1993, 315 pp.

[2] B. N. Bruk, V. N. Burkov, “Metody ekspertnykh otsenok v zadachakh uporyadocheniya ob'ektov”, Izvestiya AN SSSR. Tekhnicheskaya kibernetika, 1972, 29–39

[3] P. Ji, R. Jiang, “Scale transitivity in the AHP”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54 (2003), 896–905 | DOI | Zbl

[4] Yucheng Dong, Yinfeng Xu, Hongyi Li, Min Dai, “A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP”, European Journal of Operational Research, 186 (2008), 229–242 | DOI | MR | Zbl

[5] V. A. Blyumberg, V. F. Gluschenko, Kakoe reshenie luchshe? Metod rasstanovki prioritetov, Lenizdat, L., 1982, 160 pp.

[6] J. Perez, J. L. Jimeno, E. Mokotoff, “Another Potential Shortcoming of AHP”, Sociedad de Estadistica e Investigacion Operativa, 14 (2006), 99–111 | MR | Zbl

[7] M. V. Mikhalevich, “Remarks on the Dyer-Saaty controversy”, Cybernetics and Systems Analysis, 30 (1994), 5 | MR

[8] T. J. Stewart, “A critical Survey on the Status of Multiple Criteria Decision Making”, Theory and Practice. University of Cape Town, South Africa, 1992, 19

[9] Berzh K. Teoriya grafov i ee primeneniya, Izd. in. lit., M., 1962, 147 pp.

[10] T.L. Saaty, Decision-making with the AHP. Why is the principal eigenvector necessary, v. 145, European Journal of Operational Research, 2003, 85–91 pp. | MR | Zbl