• Korean Management Science Review
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.139-153
• /
• 2002

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is known as a very useful decision-making model developed for obtaining the relative weights of alternatives through pairwise comparison in the context of hierarchical structure. In this paper, we propose a method to reflect the reliability of evaluators in the process of pairwise comparison. This method is applied to the evaluation of aerospace technology alternatives. We have conducted a questionnaire survey for S company that is one of the representative aerospace companies in Korea. A questionnaire was designed for obtaining both the priority with considering the reliability of evaluators' importance weights (the modified AHP priority) and the priority with assuming equally reliable evaluators' importance weights (the AHP priority) in order to compare the priority derived by each of two methods. The result shows that there exists the difference hard to neglect between the final priorities gained by two methods.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.92-98
• /
• 2010

The AHP methodology compares criteria, or alternatives with respect to a criterion, in a natural, pairwise mode. AHP has been applied in a wide variety of applications multi objective decision making being just one. If a group of expert with different aspect, they need some way to revise expert group. We proposed the concatenation of expert to survey the AHP pairwise question for multi-attribute decision making. In this paper, we suggest a way to revise the expert's priorities in hierarch using concept of different group opinion.