群体两两比较判断集成的最短距离方法

中国管理科学 ›› 2004, Vol. ›› Issue (5): 124-130.

群体两两比较判断集成的最短距离方法

冯俊文

南京理工大学经济管理学院江苏南京 210094

收稿日期:2003-11-14 修回日期:2004-07-26 出版日期:2004-10-28 发布日期:2012-03-07
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(79870030)

Minimum Distance Method for Group Pairwise Comparison Judgments

FENG Jun-wen

School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210094, China

Received:2003-11-14 Revised:2004-07-26 Online:2004-10-28 Published:2012-03-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文将Yu和Cook等提出的一般距离的概念应用到群体决策问题中,基于AHP原理,给出了群体决策集成问题的定义,综述了现有的两两比较判断集成方法,提出了一种基于最短距离的集成方法——最短距离方法(Mini-mum Distance Method,MSM),并用数值例示进行了说明,最后讨论了群体决策以及AHP未来可能的研究课题。

关键词: 群体决策, 层次分析法, 集成方法, 两两比较判断, 最短距离

Abstract: The general distance concept proposed by Yu and Cook et al.is used to solve the group decision mak-ing problems.Based on the principle of AHP,the aggregation problem for group decision making is defined,the existing approaches of pairwise comparison judgments aggregation are reviewed,and a new aggregation method called Minimum Distance Method(MDM)for group decision making is proposed,and numerical illustrations are given to demonstrate the applicability of MDM.Finally,some possible future research directions in group decision making and AHP related areas are put forward.

Key words: group decision making, analytic hierarchy process(AHP), aggregating method, pairwise comparison judgment, minimum distance

中图分类号:

F8301.9

冯俊文. 群体两两比较判断集成的最短距离方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2004, (5): 124-130.

FENG Jun-wen. Minimum Distance Method for Group Pairwise Comparison Judgments[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2004, (5): 124-130.

参考文献

[1] Saaty,T. L The Analytic Hierarchy Process[M]. McGraw - Hill, New York, 1980.
[2] Zahedi F. A simulation study of estimation methods in the analytic hierarchy process [J]. Socio - Economic Planning Sciences, 1986,20: 347 - 354.
[3] Crawford G. and C. Williams. The geometric mean procedure for estimating the scale of a judgment matrix [J].Mathematical Modeling, 1987,9: 327 - 334.
[4] Johnson C. R. et al. A note on right- left asymmetry in eigenvector ranking procedure[J]. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1979,19 (1): 61 - 64.
[5] Chu A. T. W. et al. A comparison of the eigenvalue method and the geometric mean procedure for ratio scaling [J]. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1986,10: 69 -78.
[6] Kocaoglu D. F. A participative approach to program evaluation [J]. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1983,30(3) :55 -61.
[7] Ra J. W. Analysis of the column- row sums approach for pairwise comparisons, unpublished M. S. Thesis [D].School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, 1987.
[8] Ra J. W. Analysis of expert judgments in hierarchical decision process [D]. Ph. D. Dissertation,University of Pittsburgh, 1988.
[9] Zhou S. D. The development and evaluation of aggregation methods for group pairwaise comparison judgments [D].Ph. D. dissertation,Portland State University, 1995.
[10] Aczel C. and T. L. Saaty. Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgments[J]. Journal of mathematical Psychology,1983,27: 93 - 102.
[11] Aezel C. and T. L. Saaty. Synthesizing judgments:a functional equation approach [J]. Mathematical Modeling, 1987,9:311 - 320.
[12] Aczel C. and T. L. Saaty. On synthesis of judgments [J]. Socio - Economic Planning Sciences, 1986,20: 333- 339.
[13] Kemeny J. G. and L. J. Snell. Preference Ranking:Axiomatic Approach[M]. Ginn and Co. ,Boston, 1962.
[14] Yu. P. L. A class of solutions for group decision problems [J]. Management Science, 1973,19 (8): 936 - 946.
[15] Cook W. D. and K. Moshe,Deriving weights from pariwise comparison ratio matrices: an axiomatic approach[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1988,37:355 -362.