Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
NOMINAL SCALES
Invariant under one to one correspondence. Used to name
or label objects. Like assigning a number to each object; for example,
handing out numbers for order of service to people in a queue.
ORDINAL SCALES
Invariant under monotone transformations. Cannot be
multiplied or added even if the numbers belong to the
same scale. Things are ordered by number but the magnitudes of the
numbers only serve to designate order, increasing or decreasing; for
example, assigning two numbers 1 and 2, to two people to indicate that one
is taller than the other, without including any information about their actual
heights. The smaller number may be assigned to the taller person and vice
versa.
INTERVAL SCALES
Invariant under a linear transformation ax + b
a > 0 , b 0.
RATIO SCALES
Invariant under a positive similarity transformation
ax, a > 0. An example is converting weight measured in
pounds to kilograms by using the similarity transformation K = 2.2 P. The ratio
of the weights of the two objects is the same regardless of whether the
measurements are done in pounds or in kilograms. The ratio of two readings
from a ratio scale such as 6 kg/ 3 kg = 2 is a number that belongs to an
absolute scale that says that the 6 kg object is twice heavier than the 3 kg
object. The ratio 2 cannot be changed by some formula to another number.
Thus we introduce the next scale.
Numbers from the same ratio scale can be added and multiplied . Different ratio scales
can be multiplied as in physics.
ABSOLUTE SCALES
Invariant under the identity transformation.Numbers in the
same absolute scale can be both added and multiplied.
Scales
Nominal Scale
Ordinal Scale
Interval Scale
Ratio Scale
Absolute Scale:
Linear Hierarchy
Goal
Criteria
Subcriteria
component,
cluster
(Level)
element
Alternatives
Chess Factors
T (1) Calculation (Q): The ability of a player to evaluate different alternatives or strategies in light of prevailing
situations.
B (2) Ego (E): The image a player has of himself as to his general abilities and qualification and his desire to win.
T (3) Experience (EX): A composite of the versatility of opponents faced before, the strength of the tournaments
participated in, and the time of exposure to a rich variety of chess players.
B (4) Gamesmanship (G): The capability of a player to influence his opponent's game by destroying his
concentration and selfconfidence.
T (5) Good Health (GH): Physical and mental strength to withstand pressure and provide endurance.
B (6) Good Nerves and Will to Win (GN): The attitude of steadfastness that ensures a player's health perspective
while the going gets tough. He keeps in mind that the situation involves two people and that if he holds out the
tide may go in his favor.
T (7) Imagination (IM): Ability to perceive and improvise good tactics and strategies.
T (8) Intuition (IN): Ability to guess the opponent's intentions.
T (9) Game Aggressiveness (GA): The ability to exploit the opponent's weaknesses and mistakes to one's
advantage. Occasionally referred to as "killer instinct."
T (10) Long Range Planning (LRP): The ability of a player to foresee the outcome of a certain move, set up
desired situations that are more favorable, and work to alter the outcome.
T (11) Memory (M): Ability to remember previous games.
B (12) Personality (P): Manners and emotional strength, and their effects on the opponent in playing the game
and on the player in keeping his wits.
T (13) Preparation (PR): Study and review of previous games and ideas.
T (14) Quickness (Q): The ability of a player to see clearly the heart of a complex problem.
T (15) Relative Youth (RY): The vigor, aggressiveness, and daring to try new ideas and situations, a quality
usually attributed to young age.
T (16) Seconds (S): The ability of other experts to help one to analyze strategies between games.
B (17) Stamina (ST): Physical and psychological ability of a player to endure fatigue and pressure.
T (18) Technique (M): Ability to use and respond to different openings, improvise middle game tactics, and steer
the game to a familiar ground to one's advantage.
Chess Competition
Technical
EX
GH
IM
IN
GA
LRP
Behavioral
Player A
PR
RY
Player B
GNWW
ST
C4
C1
Feedback
C2
C3
Loop in a component indicates inner dependence of the elements in that
component with respect to a common property.
where
(j1)
Wi1
Wij =
(j1)
Wi2
(j1)
Wini
(j2)
(jnj)
(j2)
(jnj)
(j2)
(jnj)
Wi1
Wi2
Wini
Wi1
Wi2
Wini
Supermatrix of a Hierarchy
C1
C2
e11
e1n e21
CN-2
e2n
e11
C1
e1n1
e21
C2
W=
e2n2
eN1
CN
eNnN
e(N-2)1
CN-1
e(N-2) nN-2
e(N-1)1
CN
eN1
e(N-1) nN-1
eNn
W21 0
0 W32
0
0
0
0
Wn-1, n-2 0
0
0 Wn, n-1 I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W k=
Wn,n-1 Wn-1,n-2
for k>n-1
Wn,n-1Wn-1,n-2 Wn,n-1 I
Goal
Satisfaction with School
Learning
Friends
School
A
School
Life
Vocational
Training
School
B
College
Prep.
Music
Classes
School
C
Goal
0
0.32
0.14
0.03
0.13
0.24
0.14
0
0
0
Learning
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.16
0.59
0.25
Friends
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.33
0.33
0.34
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Goal
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3676
0.3781
0.2543
Learning
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.16
0.59
0.25
Friends
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.33
0.33
0.34
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2.
3.
Low
Level
Recreation
Intermediate
Level
HydroElectric
Power
High
Level
Flood Control
Low
Low
1
Medium 1/5
High
1/7
Med
5
1
1/4
High Eigenvector
7
.722
4
.205
1
.073
Recreation
Power Generation
Low
Low
1
Medium 7
High
5
Med
1/7
1
1/3
High Eigenvector
1/5
.072
3
.649
1
.279
Low
Low
1
Medium 5
High
9
Med
1/5
1
5
High Eigenvector
1/9
.058
1/5
.207
1
.735
Flood Control
Recreation
Hydro-Electric
Power
2) At
Intermediate
Level, which
attribute is
satisfied best?
Flood Control
Recreation
Hydro-Electric
Power
Eigenvector
.637
.258
.105
Flood Control
Recreation
Hydro-Electric
Power
F
1
5
9
1) At Low
Level, which
attribute is
satisfied best?
Eigenvector
.200
.600
.200
Eigenvector
.060
.231
.709
3) At High
Level, which
attribute is
satisfied best?
0
0
0 .637 .200 .060
0
0
0 .258 .600 .231
0
0
0 .105 .200 .709
.722 .072 .058
0
0
0
.205 .649 .207
0
0
0
.073 .279 .735
0
0
0
The final priorities for both, the height of the dam and for the
criteria were obtained from the limiting power of the supermatrix.
The components were not weighted here because the matrix is
already column stochastic and would give the same limiting
result for the ratios even if multiplied by the weighting constants.
Its powers stabilize after a few iterations. We have
F
R
E
L
M
H
0
0
0
.223
.372
.405
0
0
0
.223
.372
.405
0
0
0
.223
.372
.405
.241
.374
.385
0
0
0
.241
.374
.385
0
0
0
.241
.374
.385
0
0
0
Subfactors
Conventional
adjustment
Economic
Restructuring
Consumption (C)
Exports (X)
Investment (I)
Fiscal Policy (F)
Monetary Policy (M)
Confidence (K)
Adjustment Period
Required for
3 months
Turnaround
6 months
12 months
24
Conventional Economic
Adjustment Restructuring
Consumption (C)
Exports (E)
Investment (I)
Fiscal Policy (FP)
Monetary Policy (MP)
Confidence (K)
3 months
Primary Factors
6 months
12 months
24 months
Subfactors
Adjustment Period
Required for turnaround
Panel A: Which subfactor has the greater potential to influence Conventional Adjustment and how s
C
Consumption
Exports
Investment
Confidence
Fiscal Policy
Monetary Policy
(C)1
(E) 1/7
(I) 1/5
(K) 5
(F) 2
(M)5
Vector
Weights
7
1
5
5
5
7
5
1/5
1
5
3
5
1/5
1/5
1/5
1
1/5
1
1/2
1/5
1/3
5
1
5
1/5
1/7
1/5
1
1/5
1
0.118
0.029
0.058
0.334
0.118
0.343
Panel B: Which subfactor has the greater potential to influence Economic Restructuring and how st
FS
Financial
Sector
(FS) 1
Defense
Posture
(DS) 1/3
Global
Competition
(GC)1/3
DP
GC
Vector
Weights
0.584
0.281
1/3
0.135
1
5
7
7
1/5
1
5
5
1/7
1/5
1
3
1/7
1/5
1/3
1
.043
.113
.310
.534
1
1
5
5
1
1
5
5
1/5
1/5
1
3
1/5
1/5
1/3
1
.078
.078
.305
.538
1
1/5
1/7
1/7
12
24
5
1
1/5
1/7
7
5
1
5
7
7
1/5
1
3 months
6 months
12 months
24 months
1
1
5
5
1/5
1/5
1
1
1/5
1/5
1
1
.083
.083
.417
.417
1
1
3
5
1
1
5
5
1/3
1/5
1
1
1/5
1/5
1
1
.099
.087
.382
.432
Vec. Wts.
.605
.262
.042
.091
1
1
5
5
3
3 months
6 months
12 months
24 months
1
1/3
1/5
1/5
12
3
1
1/5
1/5
5
5
1
1/5
24
5
5
5
1
Vec. Wts.
.517
.305
.124
.054
1
3
5
7
1/3
1
5
7
1/5
1/5
1
5
1/7
1/7
1/5
1
.049
.085
.236
.630
1
3
5
7
1/3
1
5
7
1/5
1/5
1
5
1/7
1/7
1/5
1
Vec. Wts.
.049
.085
.236
.630
1
1
5
5
6
1
1
5
5
12
24
1/5
1/5
1
3
1/5
1/5
1/3
1
Vec. Wts.
.078
.078
.305
.538
CA
1
1/5
R
5
1
Vec. Wts.
.833
.167
Panel B: 6 Months
CA
CA 1
R 1/5
R
5
1
Vec. Wts.
.833
.167
Conventional Adjustment
Restructuring
Panel C: 1 Year
CA
R
CA
1
1
R
1
1
CA
R
Panel D: 2 Years
Vec. Wts.
.500
.500
CA
R
CA
1
5
R Vec. Wts.
1/5
.167
1
.833
Conven.
Adjust
Economic.
Restru.
Exports
Invest.
Confid.
Fiscal
Policy
Monet.
Policy
Financ.
Sector
Defense
Posture
Global
Compet.
3 mo.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.500
0.167
0.833 0.833
0.500
0.833
0.167 0.167
+--------------------------
------+
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.118 0.0
Exports
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.029 0.0
Invest.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.058 0.0
Confid.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.334 0.0
Fiscal
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.118 0.0
Policy
Defense
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.281 0.0
Posture
Global
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.135 0.0
Compet.
+----+
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
3 months 0.0
0.0
0.043
0.083
0.078
0.517
0.099
0.605
0.049
0.049
0.089 0.0
6 months 0.0
0.0
0.113
0.083
0.078
0.305
0.086
0.262
0.085
0.085
0.089 0.0
1 year
0.0
0.0
0.310
0.417
0.305
0.124
0.383
0.042
0.236
0.236
0.209 0.0
2
years
0.0
0.0
0.534
0.417
0.539
0.054
0.432
0.091
0.630
0.630
0.613
0.0
Consum.
6 mo.
1 yr.
2 years
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Invest.
Confid.
Fiscal
Policy
Monet.
Policy
Financ.
Sector
Defense
Posture
Global
Compet.
3 mo.
6 mo.
1 yr.
2 years
0.0
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484
0.484 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516
0.516 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.057
0.057
0.057
0.057
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.014
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.028
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.162
0.162
0.162
0.162
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.057
0.057
0.057
0.057
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.166
0.166
0.166
0.166
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.301
0.301
0.301
0.301
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.145
0.145
0.145
0.145
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.070
0.224
0.224 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.151
0.151 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.201
0.201 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.424
0.424 0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Synthesis/Results
When the judgments were made, the AHP framework
was used to perform a synthesis that produced the
following results. First a meaningful turnaround in the
economy would likely require an additional ten to
eleven months, occurring during the fourth quarter of
1992. This forecast is derived from weights generated
in the first column of the limiting matrix in Table 6,
coupled with the mid-points of the alternate time
periods (so as to provide unbiased estimates:
.224 x 1.5 + .151 x 4.5 + .201 x 9 + .424 x 18 =
10.45 months from late December 1991/early January
1992
Time period
Three months
Six months
Twelve months
Twenty Four
0 + (3 0 )/2 = 1.5
3 + (6 3)/2 = 4.5
6 + (12 6)/2 = 9.0
12 + (24 12)/2 = 18.0
Midpt x Priority
.45871
.92623
1.63629
5.51808
TOTAL 8.53932
Hamburger Model
Estimating Market Share of Wendys, Burger King and McDonalds
with respect to the single economic control criterion
How
How to
to Pose
Pose the
the Question
Question to
to
Make
Make Paired
Paired Comparisons
Comparisons
One
Onemust
mustanswer
answerquestions
questionsof
ofthe
thefollowing
followingkind:
kind:given
given
McDonalds
McDonalds(in
(inthe
theAlternatives
Alternativescluster)
cluster)isisits
itseconomic
economic
strength
strengthderived
derivedmore
morefrom
fromCreativity
Creativityor
orfrom
fromFrequency
Frequency
(both
(bothin
inthe
theAdvertising
Advertisingcluster)?
cluster)? Conversely,
Conversely,given
given
Creativity
Creativityininthe
theAdvertising
Advertisingcluster
clusterwho
whoisismore
more
dominant,
dominant,McDonalds
McDonaldsor
orBurger
BurgerKing?
King?
Then,
Then,again,
again,by
bycomparing
comparingthe
thedominance
dominanceimpact
impactof
ofthe
the
clusters
clustersof
ofAdvertising
Advertisingand
andQuality
Qualityof
ofFood
Foodon
onthe
the
economic
economicsuccess
successof
ofMcDonald
McDonaldby
byweighting
weightingand
and
normalizing
normalizingwe
wecan
canrelate
relatethe
therelative
relativeeffect
effectofofelements
elementsinin
these
thesedifferent
differentclusters.
clusters.
O
t
h
e
r
Q
Ad
C
o
m
p
Quality
Advertising
Competition
Local:
Menu
Cleanli
ness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputa
tion
Take
Out
Portion
Taste
Nutri
tion
Freq
uency
Promo
tion
Creativ
ity
Wendys
Burger
King
McDonalds
Menu Item
Cleanliness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputation
Take-Out
Portion
Taste
Nutrition
Frequency
Promotion
Creativity
Wendy's
Burger King
McDonalds
0.0000
0.6370
0.1940
0.0000
0.0530
0.1170
0.0000
0.0000
0.2290
0.6960
0.0750
0.7500
0.1710
0.0780
0.3110
0.1960
0.4930
0.0000
0.0000
0.7500
0.0780
0.1710
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5000
0.2500
0.2500
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1880
0.0000
0.0000
0.0810
0.7310
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0990
0.3640
0.5370
0.0000
0.5190
0.2850
0.0000
0.0980
0.0000
0.0980
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5280
0.1400
0.3330
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0950
0.2500
0.6550
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5000
0.8330
0.0000
0.1670
0.1670
0.8330
0.0000
0.0950
0.2500
0.6550
0.1930
0.2390
0.0830
0.0450
0.2640
0.0620
0.0570
0.0570
0.2800
0.6270
0.0940
0.5500
0.3680
0.0820
0.1010
0.2260
0.6740
0.0000
0.0000
0.2900
0.0550
0.6550
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1960
0.3110
0.4940
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8570
0.0000
0.1430
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.2760
0.1280
0.5950
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.6050
0.1050
0.2910
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5940
0.1570
0.2490
0.3110
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1960
0.0000
0.4930
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5000
0.5000
0.0880
0.1950
0.7170
0.1670
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8330
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.6670
0.0000
0.3330
0.0880
0.1950
0.7170
0.1350
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.7100
0.0000
0.1550
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.8750
0.1250
0.0000
0.1170
0.2680
0.6140
0.1570
0.2760
0.0640
0.0650
0.1420
0.0300
0.2070
0.0590
0.0940
0.2800
0.6270
0.6490
0.0720
0.2790
0.0000
0.2500
0.7500
0.0510
0.1100
0.1400
0.1430
0.2240
0.2390
0.0420
0.0510
0.6490
0.0720
0.2790
0.7090
0.1130
0.1790
0.1670
0.0000
0.8330
0.1590
0.3330
0.0480
0.0240
0.1070
0.0330
0.2230
0.0740
0.5280
0.1400
0.3320
0.6610
0.1310
0.2080
0.2000
0.8000
0.0000
Other
0.198
0.066
0.607
0.129
Quality
0.500
0.000
0.000
0.500
Advertising
0.131
0.000
0.622
0.247
Competition
0.187
0.066
0.533
0.215
Weighted Supermatrix
Weighted:
Menu
Cleanli
ness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputa
tion
Take
Out
Portion
Taste
Nutri
tion
Freq
uency
Promo
tion
Creativ
ity
Wendys
Burger
King
McDonalds
Menu Item
Cleanliness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputation
Take-Out
Portion
Taste
Nutrition
Frequency
Promotion
Creativity
Wendy's
Burger King
McDonald s
0.0000
0.1262
0.0384
0.0000
0.0105
0.0232
0.0000
0.0000
0.0151
0.0460
0.0050
0.4554
0.1038
0.0474
0.0401
0.0253
0.0636
0.0000
0.0000
0.4544
0.0473
0.1036
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1974
0.0987
0.0987
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1138
0.0000
0.0000
0.0490
0.4426
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0391
0.1436
0.2118
0.0000
0.3141
0.1725
0.0000
0.0593
0.0000
0.0593
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.2082
0.0552
0.1313
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0950
0.2500
0.6550
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0990
0.0000
0.0000
0.0990
0.0550
0.0000
0.0110
0.1014
0.5056
0.0000
0.0123
0.0323
0.0845
0.0382
0.0473
0.0164
0.0089
0.0523
0.0123
0.0113
0.0113
0.0185
0.0414
0.0062
0.3338
0.2233
0.0498
0.0130
0.0291
0.0869
0.0000
0.0000
0.1755
0.0333
0.3964
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0773
0.1226
0.1948
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.4287
0.0000
0.0715
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1381
0.0640
0.2976
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.6044
0.1049
0.2907
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5940
0.1570
0.2490
0.0407
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0257
0.0000
0.0646
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.3110
0.3110
0.0217
0.0482
0.1771
0.0219
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.1091
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.4149
0.0000
0.2071
0.0217
0.0482
0.1771
0.0177
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0930
0.0000
0.0203
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.5444
0.0778
0.0000
0.0289
0.0662
0.1517
0.0293
0.0516
0.0120
0.0121
0.0265
0.0056
0.0387
0.0110
0.0062
0.0185
0.0413
0.3455
0.0383
0.1485
0.0000
0.0537
0.1611
0.0095
0.0205
0.0261
0.0267
0.0418
0.0446
0.0078
0.0095
0.0428
0.0047
0.0184
0.3773
0.0601
0.0953
0.0359
0.0000
0.1788
0.0297
0.0622
0.0090
0.0045
0.0200
0.0062
0.0417
0.0138
0.0348
0.0092
0.0219
0.3519
0.0697
0.1107
0.0429
0.1718
0.0000
Limiting Supermatrix
Synthesized:
Global
Menu
Cleanli
ness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputa
tion
Take
Out
Portion
Taste
Nutri
tion
Freq
uency
Promo
tion
Creativ
ity
Wendys
Burger
King
McDonalds
Menu Item
Cleanliness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputation
Take-Out
Portion
Taste
Nutrition
Frequency
Promotion
Creativity
Wendy's
Burger King
McDonalds
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
0.0234
0.0203
0.0185
0.0072
0.0397
0.0244
0.0296
0.0152
0.0114
0.0049
0.0073
0.2518
0.1279
0.1388
0.0435
0.0784
0.1579
Relative local weights: Wendys= 0.156, Burger King =0.281, and McDonalds=0.566
Validation
The same problem worked as a
simple and
a complex hierarchy and as a
feedback network.
Hamburger Model
Synthesized Local:
Other
Quality
Menu Item
Cleanliness
Speed
Service
Location
Price
Reputation
Take-Out
Portion
Taste
Nutrition
Simple Hierarchy
(Three Level)
Wendys
Burger King
McDonalds
0.3055
0.2305
0.4640
0.132
0.115
0.104
0.040 Synthesized Local Contd:
0.224
Advertising
Frequency
0.138
Promotion
0.167
Creativity
0.086
Competition
Wendys
0.494
Burger King
0.214
McDonalds
0.316
Complex Hierarchy
(Several Levels)
0.1884
0.2689
0.5427
Feedback
Network
0.156
0.281
0.566
0.485
0.246
0.267
0.156
0.281
0.566
Actual
Market
Share
0.1320
0.2857
0.5823
Income
Relative Relative
Share
Share
(Income (Model)
)
Total
7,914,051
TELESP
5,104,000
64.5
64.5
BCP
1,778,951
22.5
20.9
TESS
1,032,000
13.0
14.6
Actual
(yr 2000)
American
23.9
24.0
United
18.7
19.7
Delta
18.0
18.0
Northwest
11.4
12.4
Continental
9.3
10.0
US Airways
7.5
7.1
Southwest
5.9
6.4
2.9
Alternatives
Nike
Reebok
Adidas
Actual Market
Share
39.200
15.100
10.900
40.670
15.040
11.330
Others
34.800
32.970
55%
53.8%
Asian
European
28.4%
16.6%
30.3%
15.9%
Amit Prashar (February, 2005 class)upon seeing his market share results wrote:
Actual Market Values
Dell
64.75% 67.83%
IBM
22.60% 23.56%
Toshiba 12.64% 8.61%
Saaty Compatibility Index 1.041 which is much less than 1.10 recommended
The results are very close ( I WAS REALLY STUNNED..Geez..- UNBELIEVABLE)
0.05
0.47
0.10
0.15
0.24
C2
Sum
Normalized
Sum
C1
C2
(3/10)
(7/10)
Weighte
d Sum
A1
4/10
A1
1/3
3/7
4/10
A2
6/10
A2
2/3
4/7
6/10
Ideal Measurement
Different
measures
C1
C2
Idealized
Values
C1
C2
A1
A1
1/5
A2
A2
2/3
a11
a21
a12 a11
a22 a21
a11
a11
a12
a11
a21
a 12
a11a11 a12 a21
a 22
a21a11 a22 a21
+
a11
a12
a21
a21
a22
a21
a12
a11a12 a12
a22
a21a12 a22
a22
a22
a12
a22
a22
A1 ... An
A1 w1 w1 ... w1 wn
Aw M M ... M
An wn w1 ... wn wn
w1
M
wn
w1
n M n w
wn
iaijji
all i.
1/ a
12
1
M
1/ a1n 1/ a2 n
... a2 n
M M
... 1
How to go from
Aw=nw
to
Aw=cw
and then to
Aw=maxw
ij
w j = max wi
j=1
w =
i
i=1
1 2
1 0
0
A
, I
, I
3
4
0
1
0
2
1
( A I )
3
4
A I (1 )(4 ) 6 2 5 2 0
5 33
2
5 33
2
2
1
wj
j 1
j 1
wi
wj
j 1
wi
j 1
j 1
Thus for a row stochastic matrix we have 1= min aij max max aij 1, thus max =1.
w1 = ( vTj A w1 /( 1 - j ) vTj w j ) w j
j= 2
Some Answers
(Only to be a little helpful)
One structures a hierarchy from a goal download to criteria, subcriteria and goals, involving actors
and stakeholders and terminating in alternatives at the bottom. The ideas to go gradually from the
general to the particular. In a network, elements are put in clusters or components with their
connections indicating influence.
Comparisons are more scientific in deriving scales because they use a unit and estimate multiples of
that unit rather than simply assigning numbers by guessing.
Reciprocals are needed because if one element is five times more important than another then the
other is a forteori one fifth as important as the first. One deals with homogeneous clusters to make
the comparisons possible, closer and more accurate.
The scale 1-9 helps us quantify our feelings and judgments in comparing elements.
Human judgment expressed in the form of paired comparisons is naturally inconsistent. A modicum
of inconsistency enables us to improve our understanding by focusing on the most inconsistent
judgments.
The minimum number of judgments needed to connect n elements is n-1. Redundant judgments
improve the validity of the derived priority vector.
Ratios and ratio scales give us information on both the rank order of the elements and on their
relative values. It also makes possible proportionate resource allocation.
Weighting and adding follows from simple operations we do all the time and is no different for
priorities. Suppose the goal has two components of values 0.6 and 0.4, and assume that one has a 0.2
share in the first component and a 0.7 share in the second. The total share with respect to the goal is
0.6 x 0.2 + 0.4 x 0.7 = 0.4.
The supermatrix is the framework for organizing the priorities derived from paired comparisons.
Raising it to powers gives the overall influence of each element on all the other elements.