ch12 multi criteria decision making
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
1/23
Multiple Criteria Decision Making
I. Multifactor decision making II. Multicriteria decision making
Luu Van ThanhSource: Dr. Ho Thanh Phong
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
2/23
Many decision-making problems involve a number ofcriteria. The criteria, also called attribute or factor , not objectives . always conflict with each others.
Distinguish between multi-objective and multi-criteria:
Quantitative methods1. Introduction
Multi-objective Multi-criteriaSolutions Not available, unlimited Available, limited
MethodsMathematical programming(basically on Linear Programming)
Specialized methods
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
3/23
Examples:
Buying a new or used car : criteria are price, RAM,software adaptability, . . .
Selecting a job : criteria are salary, location, career
Selecting a person for a special position : criteriaare degree, skills, public relations . . .
Because there are many factors to be considered, a
quantitative approach is often used
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
4/23
2. Multi-factor decision making
In multi-factor decision making, individualsubjectively and intuitively consider the various
factors in making their selection.
All of the important factors can be given appropriate
weights and each alternatives can be evaluated in
terms of these factors.
This approach is called the Multi-Factor Evaluation
Process (MFEP)
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
5/23
Example: Steve Markel, an undergraduate business
major, is looking at several job opportunities.According to Steve, three important factors in
selecting a good job are:
Salary Career advancement
Location
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
6/23
Step 1: Give weight to each factor
Step 2: Choose the most important alternatives ( non- dominated alternatives) e.g. Jobs at AA, BB and CC companies
Step 3: Evaluate the 3 factors on each of these jobs
Table 11.1. Factor weightsFACTOR WEIGHT
Salary 0.3Career advancement 0.6Location 0.1
FACTOR AA BB CCSalary 0.7 0.8 0.9Career advancement 0.9 0.7 0.6Location 0.6 0.8 0.9
Table 11.2. Factor Evaluations
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
7/23
Step 4: Determine a total weighted evaluation for each of the job
FACTOR WEIGHT FACTOR EVALUATION WEIGHTED EVALUSalary 0.3 x 0.7 = 0.21
Career advancement 0.6 x 0.9 = 0.54Location 0.1 x 0.6 = 0.06Total 1 0.81
Table 11.3. Evaluation of AA Co.
FACTOR WEIGHT FACTOR EVALUATION WEIGHTED EVALUSalary 0.3 x 0.8 = 0.24Career advancement 0.6 x 0.7 = 0.42Location 0.1 x 0.8 = 0.08Total 1 0.74
Table 11.4. Evaluation of BB Co.
FACTOR WEIGHT FACTOR EVALUATION WEIGHTED EVALUSalary 0.3 x 0.9 = 0.27Career advancement 0.6 x 0.6 = 0.36Location 0.1 x 0.9 = 0.09
Total 1 0.72
Table 11.5. Evaluation of CC Co.
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
8/23
Step 5: Compare the final total weighted and give decisionCompare the total weighted evaluation, AA Co. receives the
highest value
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
9/23
3. Multicriteria Decision Making In situations when we can not assign evaluations and
weights to the various decision factors, the multifactor
evaluation process should not be used.
In these cases, Multicriteria decision approachs will beused:
Utility Theory - Prof. Ralph Keeney ,Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) - Prof. ThomasSaaty (1980).ELECTREE I and II - Prof. Roy (1967),PROMETHEE - Prof. J.P. Brans (1982)
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
10/23
3.1. The Hierarchy:
This process involves pair wise comparisons. Startedby laying out the overall hierarchy of the decision.
The decision includes the determinations of factors to
be considered, sub-factors , and eventually thealternatives.
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
11/23
Example: Buying car the best car
There are three criteria:CostQuality
SafetyComfortability
MaintenanceInsurance
Services
Concept of dominanceapplied for screeningalternatives before using
AHP.
And three alternatives:Honda, Mercedes, Hyundai
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
12/23
Select the"best" car
COST Maintenance Quality
ServiceInsurance
Honda Mercedes Huyndai
Level 0
Level 1
Criteria
Level 2
Sub-criteria
Alternatives
Fig. 11.1 The Hierarchy for problem Buying the best car
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
13/23
3.2 Computational procedure We will use the above car example to illustrate the procedure. The
Hierarchy diagram is shown in Figure 11.1.
The key to using AHP is pairwise comparison. There are 9 levelsof comparison:1. Equally preferred
2. Equally to moderately preferred3. Moderately preferred4. Moderately to strongly preferred5. Strongly preferred
6. Strongly to very strongly preferred7. Very strongly preferred8. Very to extremely strongly preferred9. Extremely preferred
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
14/23
The levels of 2, 4, 6, 8 is the intermediate ones. Thecorresponding scores range from 1 to 9.
The comparison process begins from the lowest levelto the highest one. We illustrate here the highest levelcomparison.
Step 1: Criterion comparisonTable 11.6 Criterion comparison
Price Mantenance Quality
Price 1 3 5
Maintenance 1/3 1 2
Quality 1/5 1/2 1
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
15/23
Normalize values:The number in the matrix are divided by their respective column
totals as follow: ( Table 11.7. Value normalization)
Find the average of the various rows from the matrix asfollows: (Column vector)
The process is repeated for the sub-criteria until theevaluation for all other alternatives. This example will besupported by a software named Expert Choice.
Price Maintenance QualityPrice 0.652 0.667 0.625Maintenance 0.217 0.222 0.25Quality 0.131 0.111 0.125
AveragePrice 0.648Mainternance 0.23
Quality 0.122
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
16/23
Step 2: Determining the Consistency Ratio - CR
In practical problems, we are not always able to establish the
bridging relation in pairwise comparisons.
For example, alternative A may be better than B, B may be
better than C but this does not always mean that A is better
than C.
This shows the realistic characteristic of practical problems
which is called inconsistency.
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
17/23
Inconsistency is real but its volume should not be too
big, hence showing that the evaluation is not accurate.
To assess the inconsistency of each level, Consistency
Ratio- CR is used. If CR is equal or lower than 0.1, it
means that the decision makers evaluation is relatively
consistent. In contrary, re-evaluation of relevant level
should be carried out.
Determining CR process follows 3 steps
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
18/23
1. Determining the Consistency vector We begin by determining the weighted sum vector.This is done by multiplying the column vector times thepairwise comparison matrix.Column vector:
Pairwise comparison matrix:
Price 0.648
Mainternance = 0.230Quality 0.122
1 3 5
1/3 1 21/5 1/2 1
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
19/23
After multiplying the matrix, we get weighted sum vector:
1.9480.6900.366
Consistency vector = Weighted sum vector/ Column vectorConsistency vector:
1.948 / 0.648 3.006
0.690 / 0.230 = 3.00
0.366 / 0.122 3.00
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
20/23
2. Determining and the Consistency Index-CI is characteristic value or Eigen value of comparison matrix
(remember that this matrix is squared). The value of is simplythe average value of the consistency vector:
= (3.006+3.0+3.0) / 3 = 3.002The formula for CI is:
CI = (3.002 - 3) / (3 - 1) = 0.001
3. Determining the Consistency Ratio-CR The formula of CR is:
1n
nCI
RI
CI CR
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
21/23
Where RI (Random Index) is determined from belowtable:
Therefore, with n = 3, we get RI = 0.58
CR = 0.001 / 0.58 = 0.0017Since 0< CR < 0.1 , we accept this result and move to thelower level. The procedure is repeated till the lowest level.
n RI
2 0.003 0.584 0.905 1.126 1.24
7 1.328 1.41
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
22/23
Continue for other levels:
For subcriteria Insurance Service:
Insurance Service
Insurance 1 3
Service 1/3 1
HONDA 25000
MER. 60000
VOLVO 65000
Honda Mer Volvo
Honda 1 1/3
Mer 3 1 2
Volvo 4 1/2 1
For Cost correspondingwith three alternatives:
For Insurance:
Honda Mer Volvo
Honda 1 3 4
Mer 1/3 1 2
Volvo 1/4 1/2 1
For Service
Honda Mer Volvo
Honda 1 1/4 1/5
Mer 4 1 1/2
Volvo 5 2 1
For Quality
And make your final evaluation (students self develop this evaluation)
-
8/4/2019 Ch12 Multi Criteria Decision Making
23/23
Notes: In general, the evaluation scores are collected frommany experts and the average scores is used in thepairwise comparison matrix.The AHP solving is computer-aided by Expert Choice
(EC) software.- Building structure of problem !!!- Enter judgments (Pairwise Comparisons)- Analysis the weights- Sensitivity Analysis- Advantages and disadvantages- Miscellaneous