Decision-making: criterion method of multi-level system research
/ 0
- Details
- Category: Information technologies, systems analysis and administration
- Last Updated on 08 November 2018
- Published on 29 October 2018
- Hits: 3195
Authors:
V.V.Kostenko, Cand. Sc. (Phys.-Math.), Biochem Environmental Solutions Inc., Financial Analyst, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
V.M.Kuznichenko, Cand. Sc. (Phys.-Math.), Assoc. Prof., orcid.org/0000-0003-1582-0696, Kharkiv Institute of Finance of the Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics, Kharkiv, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
V.I.Lapshyn, Dr. Sc. (Phys.-Math.), Prof., orcid.org/0000-0001-9988-8131, Kharkiv Institute of Finance of the Kyiv National University of Trade and Economics, Kharkiv, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract:
Purpose. Expansion of applications of the Analytical Procedure Method (APM) to multi-level decision making systems in a variety of socioeconomic fields. The development of methods that are based both on calculations and on argument-based expert opinions, which allows one to make qualitative grounded decisions in different socioeconomic fields, is an important issue.
Methodology. The method of paired comparison, the method of analytical procedure structuring of a series of alternatives and criteria (the Analytical Procedure Method).
Findings. Studies were carried out that have confirmed the legitimacy of using the Analytical Procedure Method in application to multi-level decision making systems, which allow for increased criteria detail that leads to a higher quality choice of alternatives. The problem is solved in general for an arbitrary number of levels. The method allows one to obtain the global priorities for all of the elements of a multi-level decision making system.
Originality. The method of analytical procedure is extended from two-level on the multilevel systems of decision making. Unlike the Analytic Hierarchy Process approach, here, the global priorities of the criteria are defined in a manner that is consistent with all of the elements of the multi-level system, which expands the scope of problems in which this approach can be used. When the number of alternatives (criteria) changes in the APM approach (elements of overhead and most bottom levels of the system), the initial global priorities of the alternatives (criteria) both maintain relative signs during comparisons and preserve the initial relations.
Practical value. The global priorities of the alternatives are important information to those who are making a decision. For this reason, the relations between the resulting number of them (after an increase or decrease in their amount) must remain the same during the decision making process. The offered method can be used for making decision in the different spheres of human activity.
References.
1. Saati, T. L., 2016. Making decision at dependences and feed-backs. Analytical networks. Moscow: Lenand. (Saati T. L./T. L. Saati. -М.: Lenand, 2016. -357 pp.).
2. Velasquez, M. and Hester, P. T., 2013. An analysis of multicriteria decision making methods. International J. of Operations Research, 10(2), pp. 56–66.
3. Brudermann, T., Mitterhuber, C. and Posch, A., 2014. Agricultural biogas plants – A systematic analysis of strengths, weaknesses,opportunities and threats. Energy Policy, 76, pp. 107‒111. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.022.
4. Luo, J. L. and Hu, Z. H., 2015. Risk paradigm and risk evaluation of farmers cooperatives’ technology innovation. Economic Modelling, 44, pp. 80‒85.
5. Votintseva, V. O., Sakhipova, M. S. and Deryabin, A. I., 2016. In: A. Sharapov, ed. Application of the method of hierarchy analysis for the choice of methods of designing the enterprise system architecture. Mathematics and interdisciplinary research. Perm: Perm State National Research University, pp. 201‒207.
6. Din, G. Y. and Yunusova, A., 2016. Assessment of agro-industrial investment projects -criteria and risks. Economic analysis: theory and practice, 15(7), pp. 4‒17.
7. Din, Y. G. and Yunusova, A. B., 2016. Using AHP for evaluation of criteria for agro-industrial projects. International Journal of Horticulture and Agriculture, 1(1): 6.
8. Din, G. Y., 2015. Application of the method of analysis of hierarchies in Russian and foreign studies. Proceedings of the Ufa Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 3, pp. 116‒124.
9. Kuznichenko, V. M. and Lapshyn, V. I., 2014. Methods of decision-making on the basis of pair comparisons: Decision of tasks of theory of choice and making decision at many criteria on the basis of pair comparisons: monograph. Saarbrücken: Palmarium academic publishing.
10. Kostenko, E., Kuznichenko, V. and Lapshyn, V., 2014. Comparison of Decision-Making Methods. Research in Applied Economics, 6(3), pp. 17‒27.
Archive