Skip to main content
Log in

Fuzzified AHP in the evaluation of scientific monographs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Central European Journal of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fuzzification of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is of great interest to researchers since it is a frequently used method for coping with complex decision making problems. There have been many attempts to fuzzify the AHP. We focus particularly on the construction of fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices and on obtaining fuzzy weights of objects from them subsequently. We review the fuzzification of the geometric mean method for obtaining fuzzy weights of objects from fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices. We illustrate here the usefulness of the fuzzified AHP on a real-life problem of the evaluation of quality of scientific monographs in university environment. The benefits of the presented evaluation methodology and its suitability for quality assessment of R&D results in general are discussed. When the task of quality assessment in R&D is considered, an important role is played by peer-review evaluation. Evaluations provided by experts in the peer-review process have a high level of subjectivity and can be expected in a linguistic form. New decision-support methods (or adaptations of classic methods) well suited to deal with such inputs, to capture the consistency of experts’ preferences and to restrict the subjectivity to an acceptable level are necessary. A new consistency condition is therefore defined here to be used for expertly defined fuzzy pairwise comparison matrices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Brunelli M, Canal L, Fedrizzi M (2013) Inconsistency indices for pairwise comparison matrices: a numerical study. Ann Oper Res 211:493–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Set Syst 17:233–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95:649–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng CH, Mon DL (1994) Evaluating weapon system by analytical hierarchy process based on fuzzy scales. Fuzzy Set Syst 63:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng JH, Lee CM, Tang CH (2009) An application of fuzzy delphi and fuzzy AHP on evaluating wafer supplier in semiconductor industry. Wseas Trans Inf Sci Appl 6:756–767

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford G, Williams CA (1985) A note on the analysis of subjective judgment matrices. J Math Psychol 29:387–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra TK (2013) On the extraction of weights from pairwise comparison matrices. Cent Eur J Oper Res 21:103–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enea M, Piazza T (2004) Project selection by constrained fuzzy AHP. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 3:39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güngör Z, Serhadlioglu G, Kesen SE (2009) A fuzzy AHP approach to personnel selection problem. Appl Soft Comput 9:641–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishizaka A, Lusti M (2006) How to derive priorities in AHP: a comparative study. Cent Eur J Oper Res 14:387–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishizaka A, Nguyen NH (2013) Calibrated fuzzy AHP for current bank account selection. Expert Syst Appl 40:3775–3783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krejčí J, Talašová J (2013) A proper fuzzification of Saatys scale and an improved method for computing fuzzy weights in fuzzy AHP. In: Proceedings of the 31th international conference on mathematical methods in economics 2013, Jihlava, Czech Republic. ISBN: 978-80-87035-76-4

  • Krejčí J, Pavlačka O, Talašová J (2014) On the fuzzification of the analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak (submitted)

  • Krejčí J, Jandová V, Stoklasa J, Talašová J (2012) Bodové hodnocení knih [Evaluation of monographs—in Czech]. Research report, Palacky University, Olomouc

  • Kwong CK, Bai H (2002) A fuzzy AHP approach to the determination of importance weights of customer requirements in quality function deployment. J Intell Manuf 13:367–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan NF (2008) Fuzzy AHP appproach for selecting the suitable bridge construction method. Autom Constr 17:958–965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RVVI (2012) Metodika hodnocení výsledků výzkumných organizací a hodnocení ukončených programů (platná pro léta 2010, 2011 a rok 2012) [Research, development and innovation council: methodology for the evaluation of outcomes of research organisations and the evaluation of finished programmes (valid for 2010, 2011 and 2012)---in Czech] [online]. http://www.vyzkum.cz/FrontClanek.aspx?idsekce=650022, [cited 2014-09-03]

  • Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15:234–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoklasa J, Jandová V, Talašová J (2013) Weak consistency in Saaty’s AHP—evaluating creative work outcomes of Czech Art Colleges. Neural Netw World 23:61–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesfamariam S, Sadiq R (2006) Risk-based environmental decision-making fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP). Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 21:35–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vahidnia MH, Alesheikh AA, Alimohammadi A (2009) Hospital site selection using fuzzy AHP and its derivatives. J Environ Manage 90:3048–3056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Laarhoven PJM, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Set Syst 11:199–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu R (2000) Fuzzy least-square priority method in the analytic hierarchy process. Fuzzy Set Syst 112:395–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1975) Concept of a linguistic variable and its appliation to approximate reasoning I, II. Inf Sci 8:199–249, 301–357; III. Inf Sci 9:43–80

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research was supported by the Grant GA 14-02424S of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic. The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and suggestions, which helped us improve the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jana Krejčí.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krejčí, J., Stoklasa, J. Fuzzified AHP in the evaluation of scientific monographs. Cent Eur J Oper Res 24, 353–370 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0399-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-015-0399-2

Keywords

Navigation