A Novel Approach for Ontological Representation of Analytic Hierarchy Process

Abstract:

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of the widely accepted and frequently used priority assessment methods. A number of studies, which employed the AHP method, have already been carried out in different domains to support their multi-criteria decision-making definitions and applications. However, few researchers have paid attentions to extract and represent the important concepts and their relationships from the AHP method itself. The aim of this study is firstly to propose a way for representing the AHP method as an AHP Ontology together with a set of reasoning rules. Then, a prototype assessment tool is developed to show the possibility of obtaining more flexibility and reusability of this ontological representation.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volume 988)
• Pages: 675-682
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.988.675
• Online since: July 2014
• Authors: Yong Xin Liao*, Eduardo Rocha Loures, Osiris Canciglieri Junior, Hervé Panetto
• Keywords: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Decision-Making, Ontology, Reasoning Rule

References

[1] T. L. Saaty: A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol Vol. 15, No. 3 (1977), p.234–281.

[2] O. S. Vaidya and S. Kumar: Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. Vol. 169, No. 1 (2006), p.1–29.

[3] E. Kornyshova and R. Deneckère: Decision-Making Ontology for Information System Engineering. in ER'10 Proceedings of the 29th international conference on Conceptual Modeling, Vancouver, Canada (2010).

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-16373-9_8

[4] V. X. Tran, H. Tsuji, and R. Masuda: A new QoS ontology and its QoS-based ranking algorithm for Web services. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory Vol. 17, No. 8 (2009), p.1378–1398.

DOI: 10.1016/j.simpat.2009.06.010

[5] K. Wasielewska, M. Ganzha, M. Paprzycki, P. Szmeja, M. Drozdowicz, I. Lirkov, and C. adica: Applying Saaty's Multicriterial Decision Making Approach in Grid Resource Management. Inf. Technol. Control Vol. 43, No. 1 (2014), p.73–87.

DOI: 10.5755/j01.itc.43.1.4587

[6] T. L. Saaty: How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. Vol. 48, No. 1 (1990), p.9–26.

[7] T. L. Saaty: Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. Vol. 1, no. 1 (2008), pp.83-98.

[8] T. L. Saaty: Decision making for leaders: the analytic hierarchy process for decisions in a complex world. (RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 2008).

[9] N. Noy and D. McGuinness: Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology. Technical Report, Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory (2001).

[10] Y. Liao, M. Lezoche, E. R. Loures, H. Panetto, and N. Boudjlida: Formal Semantic Annotations for Models Interoperability in a PLM environment. in The 19th World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC 2014), Cape Town, South Africa, (2014).

DOI: 10.3182/20140824-6-za-1003.02551

[11] F. Song: Contribution of ontology alignment to enterprise interoperability. University of Bordeaux 1, PhD thesis (2013).

[12] J. M. Cestari, M. Lezoche, E. R. Loures, and H. Panetto: A Research Strategy for Public Administration Interoperability Assessment. in 4th International Conference on Information Society and Technology (ICIST 2014), Kopaonik, Serbia, (2014).