You are here

Home » Content

SÖZEL DEĞERLENDİRMELİ ÇOK KRİTERLİ KARAR VERME SÜREÇLERİ İÇİN AHS VE BULANIK AHS YÖNTEMLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

COMPARISON OF AHP AND FUZZY AHP FOR THE MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING PROCESSES WITH LINGUISTIC EVALUATIONS

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2007

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
An analytical way to reach the best decision is more preferable in many business platforms. When variables are quantitative and number of criteria is not high, then one can use several analysis tools and make his/her decision and solve the problem. However, many times beside the measurable variables, there exist qualitative variables, or people are supposed to prefer the best among the many choices, thus, an analytical way to make a successful decision is needed.Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the best waysfor deciding among the complex criteria structure in different levels. Fuzzy AHP is a synthetic extension of classical AHP method when the fuzziness of the decision makers isconsidered. In this paper, the comparison of classical AHP and fuzzy AHP on a case study that is constructed for the same hierarchy structure and criteria set
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Birçok iş ortamında analitik yöntemler, en iyi kararı vermek adına daha çok tercih görmektedir. Sayısal olarak ölçülebilen değişkenlerin ve kriterlerin varlığında kullanılabilecek birçok analiz ve problem çözme tekniği bulunabilirken, kalitatif değişkenlerle seçim ya da karar verme zorunluluğu olduğunda farklı yaklaşımlaragerek duyulmaktadır. Böyle durumlarda en çok tercih edilen tekniklerden biri de Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHS)dir. Karmaşık kriter set veçoklu düzeyyapısındaseçenekler içerisinde en iyi seçimi yapma konusundabaşarılı kararlar alınmasında sık kullanıma sahiptir. Bulanık AHS ise karar vericilerin yaptıkları yorum ve değerlendirmelerde belli bir bulanıklık olduğu düşünüldüğünde ortaya çıkan ve AHS’nin bir uzantısı olarak geliştirilen sentetik bir yaklaşımdır. Buçalışmada, klasik AHS yöntemi ile bulanık AHS’ nin ayrıntılarındaki farklar örnek bir olay üzerinde gösterilmekte olup, bu karşılaştırma için aynı kriterler ve hiyerarşi yapısı kurulmuştur.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-sozel-degerlendirmeli-cok-kriterli-karar-verme-surecleri-icin-ahs-bulanik-ahs-yontemlerinin-karsilastirilmasi.pdf
  • 11
65-85
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Bard, J. F., and Sousk, S.F., (1990), “A Trade Analysis for Rough Terrain Cargo
Handlers Using The AHP: An Example of Group Decision Making”, IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management, 37, 3, 222-228.
Bevilacqua, M.,D’Amore, A., and Polonara, F., (2004), “A Multi-Criteria Decision
Approach toChoosing The Optimal Blanching-Freezing System”, Journal of Food
Engineering,63, 253-263.
Boender, C. G. E., De Graan, J. G.,andLootsma, F.A., (1989), “Multicriteria
Decision Analysis with Fuzzy Pairwise Comparisons”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,29,
133-143.
Bouyssou, D., Marchant, T., Pirlot, M., Perny, P., Tsoukias, A.,andVincke, P.,
(2000), Evaluation Models: A Critical Perspective,Kluwer, Boston.
Aşkın ÖZDAĞOĞLU, Güzin ÖZDAĞOĞLU
84
Buckley, J. J., (1985/a), “Ranking Alternatives Using Fuzzy Members”, Fuzzy Sets
and Systems,15, 21-31.
Buckley, J. J., (1985/b), “Fuzzy Hierarchical Analysis”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17,
233-247.
Chang, D. Y., (1996), “Applications of The Extent Analysis Method on Fuzzy-AHP”, European Journal of Operational Research,95, 649-655.
Chang, D. Y., (1992), “Extent Analysis and Synthetic Decision”,Optimization
Techniques and Applications,World Scientific, Singapore, 1, 352.
Cheng, C. H., (1996), “Evaluating Naval Tactical MissileSystems by Fuzzy AHP
Based on The Grade Value of Membership Function”, European Journal of
Operational Research, 96, 343-350.
Cheng, C. H., Yang, K. L., and Hwang, C. L., (1999), “Evaluating Attack
Helicopters by AHP Based on Linguistic Variable Weight”, European Journal of
Operational Research, 116, 423-435.
Kahraman, C., Cebeci, U., andDa, R., (2004), “Multi-Criterion Comparison of
Catering Service Companies Using Fuzzy AHP: The Case of Turkey ”, International
Journal of Production Economics,87, 171-184.
Kuo, R. J., Chi, S. C.,andKao, S. S., (2002), “A Decision Support System for
Selecting Convenience Store Location Through Integration of Fuzzy AHP and
Artificial Neural Network”, Computers in Industry, in Press.
Kulak, O., and Kahraman, C., (2005), “Fuzzy Multi-Criterion Selection Among
Transportation Companies Using Axiomatic Design and Analytic Hierarchy
Process”, Information Sciences,170,191-210.
Laarhoven, P. J. M.,and Pedrycz, W., (1983), “A Fuzzy Extension of Saaty’s
Priority Theory”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,11, 229-241.
Leung, L. C., and Chao, D., (2000), “On Consistency and Ranking of Alternatives in
Fuzzy AHP”, European Journal of Operational Research,124, 102-113.
Lootsma, F., (1997), Fuzzy Logic for Planning and Decision-Making,Kluwer,
Dordrecht.
Pohekar, S. D., andRamachandran, M., (2004), “Application of Multi-Criteria
Decision Making to Sustainable Energy Planning”, A Review Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews,8,365-381.
İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi Bahar2007/1
85
Ribeiro, R. A., (1996), “Fuzzy Multiple Criterion Decision Making: A Review and
New Preference Elicitation Techniques”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,78, 155-181.
Saaty, T. L., (1980),The Analytical Hierarchy Process,Mc Graw Hill, New York.
Saaty, T.L., (1994), Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with
The Analytical Hierarchy Process, RWS Publications,Pittsburgh.
Saaty, T. L., (2001), Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: Analytic
NetworkProcess, RWS Publications,Pittsburgh.
Sarkis, J., and Talluri, S., (2004), “Evaluating and Selecting e-Commerce Software
and Communication Systems for aSupply Chain”, European Journal of Operational
Research,159, 318-329.
Sheu, J. B., (2004), “A Hybrid Fuzzy -Based Approach for Identifying Global
Logistics Strategies”, Transportation Research,40, 39-61.
Taha, H. A.,(2003), Operations Research, Pearson Education Inc.,Fayetteville.
Taylor, B.W., (2004), Introduction to Management Science,Pearson Education Inc.,
New Jersey.
Tolga, E., Demircan, M .L., and Kahraman, C.,(2005), “Operating System Selection
Using Fuzzy Replacement Analysis and Analytic Hierarchy Process”, International
Journal of Production Economics.97, 89-117.
Triantaphyllou, E., and Mann, S. H., (1995), “Using The Analytic Hierarchy Process
for Decision Making in Engineering Applications: Some Challenges”, International
Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice,2, 1,35-44.
Wabalickis, R. N., (1988), “Justification of FMS with The Analytic Hierarchy
Process”, Journal of Manufacturing Systems,17, 175-182.
Weck, M., Klocke, F., Schell, H., and Rüenauver, E., (1997), “Production Cycles
Using The Extended Fuzzy AHP Method”, European Journal of Operational
Research, 100, 2, 351-366.
Yu, C. S., (2002), “A GP-AHP Method for Solving Group Decision-Making Fuzzy
AHP Problems”, Computers and Operations Research,29, 1969-2001.
Zhu, K. J., Jing, Y., and Chang, D. Y.,(1999), “A Discussion on Extent Analysis
Method and Applications of Fuzzy -AHP”, European Journal of Operational
Research,116, 450-456.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com