Towards secure judgments aggregation in AHP

Abstract

In decision-making methods, it is common to assume that the experts are honest and professional. However, this is not the case when one or more experts in the group decision making framework, such as the group analytic hierarchy process (GAHP), try to manipulate results in their favor. The aim of this paper is to introduce two heuristics in the GAHP, setting allowing to detect the manipulators and minimize their effect on the group consensus by diminishing their weights. The first heuristic is based on the assumption that manipulators will provide judgments which can be considered outliers with respect to those of the rest of the experts in the group. The second heuristic assumes that dishonest judgments are less consistent than the average consistency of the group. Both approaches are illustrated with numerical examples and simulations.

arXiv comment32 pages

References in corpus (7)

• Towards quantification of incompleteness in the pairwise comparisons method
• Inconsistency indices for incomplete pairwise comparisons matrices
• On the monotonicity of the eigenvector method
• On the geometric mean method for incomplete pairwise comparisons
• On the Properties of the Priority Deriving Procedure in the Pairwise Comparisons Method
• Heuristic Rating Estimation Approach to The Pairwise Comparisons Method
• Eigenvector Method and rank reversal in group decision making revisited

Cited by in corpus (2)

• Almost optimal manipulation of a pair of alternatives
• Detection of decision-making manipulation in the pairwise comparisons method