• Journal of Korea Water Resources Association
• /
• v.40 no.12
• /
• pp.931-941
• /
• 2007

Traditionally, the decision of river width has aimed majorly at flood control and good river conveyance. And the river width has been decided by practitioner#s subjective and empirical opinion. Recently, however, there is a need for more objective and thus quantitative decision method for decision of river width considering not only economical aspect but also social or environmental aspect. This study adopts the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) to improve the objectiveness in the decision of river width. Criteria and a standardized process are presented for field application. Using the proposed method, one can prioritize various river width and make the optimal decision. We believe that the method can serve as a useful tool for river engineers in practice.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.47-55
• /
• 2016

As one of recent issues in the information and communication industry, internet of things has attracted attention to provide intelligent infrastructure services which connect and share data and information between real and virtual world. According to the development of these internet of things technologies, types of machines, telecommunication devices, and terminals are increasing tremendously. In this situation, connectivity and interoperability between internet of things components are important issues to build a hyper connected society. To visualize this society, it is important to set up and develop information and communication technology (ICT) standards among stakeholders. However, under limited budget and human resources, it is essential to rank standardization work items for setting standards with respect to efficiency. The purpose of this study is to provide a method for setting standardization strategies within group decision making. As a multi-criteria group decision making tool, analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is adopted and applied to determine the priorities of setting work items. The proposed method first defines decision making problem with objective, criteria, and alternatives which produces a hierarchy consisting of upper and lower criteria. Then, pairwise comparisons of academy and public sector experts are performed with respect to their relative meaning and importance. Individual surveys of expert groups are collected and summarized to determine relative criteria importance measures. Furthermore, to deliver reliable importance criteria measures, differences between academy and public sector expert groups are compared and tested using Mann-Whitney non-parametric test. The results are illustrated for useful guidelines to practical group decision making in standardization strategy establishments.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.23-37
• /
• 2005

On the situation cooperating with business partners on the supply chain, systematic decision making process is a critical issue for them. The two major issues of purchasing strategy such as selecting vendors and managing them are important part of their overall business activities. This study mainly focus on the former issue of the vendor selection. Through the empirical study, analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method was applied to select vendors among supplier vendors based on four selection criteria such as the level of quality, product on management ability, delivery, and price. The results of study showed the main criteria of vender selection was the ability of quality management. The vender selected based on AHP and the current selection method was different, but implicitly projected the dilemma situation between quality and price which occurs in decision making process of real life.

• 한국디지털정책학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2005.11a
• /
• pp.367-381
• /
• 2005

On the situation cooperating with business partners on the supply chain, systematic decision making process is a critical issue for them. The two major issues of purchasing strategy such as selecting vendors and managing them are important part of their overall business activities. This study mainly focus on the former issue of the vendor selection. Through the empirical study, analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method was applied to select vendors among supplier vendors based on four selection criteria such as the level of quality, product on management ability, delivery, and price. The results of study showed the main criteria of vender selection was the ability of quality management. The vender selected based on AHP and the current selection method was different, but implicitly projected the dilemma situation between quality and price which occurs in decision making process of real life.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.369-385
• /
• 2001

A R&D project evaluation method has been applied for the national nuclear R&D projects in a developing-country setting. In the methodology, Saaty's analytic hierarchy process model is used to evaluate and rank of the selected nuclear R&D project which have a wide range of objectives and characteristics. The criteria used for evaluation related specifically to the Korea's evaluation needs and culture, and they are weighted according to their relative importance as perceived by the evaluator of the R&D project. As a real-world case of evaluation, we elicited and reproduced the evaluation process of the nuclear R&D projects which is going under the research process. As the results of the paper suggests, the methodology can be applied to the evaluation of the R&D projects and has much potential.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Propulsion Engineers Conference
• /
• 2017.05a
• /
• pp.1104-1107
• /
• 2017

In this paper, we focused on Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) as an efficient means of decision-making on the major issues that may arise during the liquid rocket engine development, reviewed the validity and applicability of the AHP through the problem of selecting the propellant of the liquid rocket engine.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.81-97
• /
• 2001

The main objective of this research is to identify the evaluation criteria of the local governments' projects for the fisheries industry development (LGPFID) and to develop the evaluation software prototype applicable to LGPFID. This research does not try to develop the whole evaluation processes and programs for LGPFID, but just to outline the approach to managing LGPFID. The evaluation processes and programs developed in this study is based on the group decision support systems(GDSS), which is a collaborative, system-oriented, and objective system useful in evaluating LGPFID. Specifically the goals of the programs are to : (1) enhance the quality of evaluation process for LGPFID; (2) provide the local government decision makers' and interest groups' access to comprehensive evaluation information; (3) support private-public collaboration in government's decision making. We used analytic hierarchy process model as a group decision making model and programmed the application software prototype with Visual Basic language.

• Journal of Information Technology Applications and Management
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.139-152
• /
• 2008

Recently organizations identify information security as one of essential means for gaining competitive advantage. However, they do not actively increase investment in this area because they consider spending for information security as a cost rather than an investment. This is because organizations don't have a clear understanding of information security objectives which can be achieved through investment, and they don't have criteria for alternatives which can be considered in information security investment decision-making. In this paper we propose to model the decision-making process of information security investment by the AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process). The results will show that availability is the most important criterion for the decision of information security alternatives, and intrusion detection is the most important information security alternative. We hope that the results of this paper provide a guideline for clear decision-making in information security investment.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Military Science and Technology
• /
• v.12 no.5
• /
• pp.557-562
• /
• 2009

Weapon system currently considers the research about effect analysis including cost effectiveness methodology for a budget management and an achievement of the military strategy goal. So that, this study considers the theoretical background, strength and weakness of several Multi-Criteria Decision Making, and an effect analysis of weapon system. And AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) is selected for the best effect analysis methodology of weapon system. Therefore, we applied AHP to the case study of the new generation Multiple Launcher Rocket System, performing the analysis of cost effectiveness methodology. Using AHP and cost effectiveness methodology, we propose the actual and proper decision making result.

• Journal of the military operations research society of Korea
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.83-96
• /
• 2002

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is well suited to group decision making and offers numerous benefits as a synthesizing mechanism in group decisions. To date, the majority of AHP applications have been in group settings. One reason for this may be that groups often have an advantage over individual when there exists a significant difference between the importance of quality in the decision and the importance of time in which to obtain the decision. Another reason may be the best alternative is selected by comparing alternative solutions, testing against selected criteria, a task ideally suited for AHP. In general, aggregation methods employed in group AHP can be largely classified into two methods: geometric mean method and (weighted) arithmetic mean method. In a situation where there do not exist clear guidelines for selection between them, two methods do not always guarantee the same group decision result. We propose a simulation approach for building group consensus without efforts to make point estimates from individual diverse preference judgments, displaying possible disagreements as is natural in group members'different viewpoints.