臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本論文利用多目標規劃的方法以有效運用於處理AHP不一致性之問題，與傳統AHP求解方式有所不同，本法將每個成對比較矩陣之權重求解問題視為單一目標，並將多個矩陣所需求的權重視為多個目標問題，以求解所有的成對比較矩陣之優先權重值；此外，於求取權重時，應用乘法式的限制式而非傳統的加法式概念，如此一來，利用上三角或下三角成對比較矩陣的區間值以進行求解時，將可以較有效的取得相同的優先順序。基於以上理由，本法將可以同時處理多個矩陣的問題，不會因為決策者制定出來的成對比較矩陣增加，而使得決策問題變得複雜影響本法的可行性；再則，為了避免成對矩陣於對角線為準的上下兩端在求解時，發生建議的選擇方案不一，因而引用了乘法式限制式。本研究所提出之方法，將可使用於精確及區間性的判斷，而在處理不一致性問題時也可以較為客觀，使得決策者在進行評估時亦較具有彈性，不會因為決策者稍微疏忽或不理性導致權重問題過於敏或，以提昇決策的品質。最後，將以三個不同類型的AHP層級式問題的例子，來對於本研究之方法進行驗證。

This research employ a multiple objective programming method to handle the inconsistent cases in AHP more efficiency. Different from the conventional AHP, our method regards that the deriving weights of all comparison matrices is as a multiple objective problem. In other words, our method can obtain all the priorities at the same time by using the multiple objective programming technique. In addition, the weights obtained by the multiplicative constraints rather than additive constraints can generate the same ranking by processing the upper or lower triangular interval judgments. Base on the above reasons, this proposed method deals with all pairewise comparison matrices at the same time by using the concept of multiple objective programming, which is more efficiently than the conventional AHP approaches. In order to derive the same priorities rank by using the upper or lower parts of triangular matrix, the multiplicative constraints are applied. Three numerical examples of the different types of hierarchical decision problems are illustrated to show the proposed method in more details.

目錄

論文摘要 ii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 viii
第一章　緒論 1
1.1　引言 1
1.2　研究背景與動機 1
1.3　研究目的 4
1.4　研究架構 6
第二章　層級分析法 8
2.1　AHP的決策程序 9
2.2　AHP的基本假設 14
2.3　AHP的優點 15
第三章 糢糊層級分析法 16
3.1　糢糊偏好規劃法 16
3.1.1　FPP的基本假設 17
3.1.2　糢糊層級分析法基本步驟 19
3.2　辭書式目標規劃法 20
3.2.1　LGP法的基本假設 21
3.3　二階段對數目標規劃法 24
3.3.1　TLGP基本假設 25
3.4　總結 28
第四章　本研究所提之方法 29
第五章　實證範例 34
5.1　範例1 34
5.2　範例2 38
5.3　範例3 42
第六章　結論與建議 50
6.1　結論 50
6.2　未來研究方向 51
參考文獻 52
附錄 56
範例一 56
範例二 57
範例三 59





表目錄

表2.1　層級分析法評比尺度之定義與說明 11
表2.2　n階正倒值矩陣的隨機指標值表 13
表5.1　選擇合夥之準則的矩陣 35
表5.2　選擇合夥的所有成對矩陣之目標值 36
表5.3　選擇合夥的所有成對矩陣之相對權重-上三角模式 36
表5.4　選擇合夥的所有成對矩陣之相對權重-下三角模式 37
表5.5　選擇合夥的所有成對矩陣之相對權重 37
表5.6　LGP法選擇合夥的所有成對矩陣之相對權 38
表5.7　投資選擇之準則的矩陣 39
表5.8　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之目標值 40
表5.9　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權重-上三角模式 40
表5.10　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權重-上三角模式 41
表5.11　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權重 42
表5.12　LGP法投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權 42
表5.13　餐飲服務供應商之準則的矩陣 44
表5.14　衛生(H)子準則之相對權重 45
表5.15　食物品質(QM)子準則之相對權重 45
表5.16　服務品質(QS)子準則之相對權重 46
表5.17　應用LGP法於衛生(H)子準則之相對權重 46
表5.18　應用LGP法食物品質(QM)子準則之相對權重 47
表5.19　應用LGP法服務品質(QS)子準則之相對權重 47
表5.20　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權重 48
表5.21　投資選擇的所有成對矩陣之相對權重-LGP法之結果 49
表A.1　選擇合夥準則的矩陣 56
表A.2　選擇於C1合夥選擇方案的矩陣 56
表A.3　選擇於C2合夥選擇方案的矩陣 56
表A.4　選擇於C3合夥選擇方案的矩陣 57
表A.5　選擇於C4合夥選擇方案的矩陣 57
表A.6　投資選擇於準則的矩陣 57
表A.7　投資選擇於各選擇方案的矩陣 58
表A.8　餐飲服務提供商選擇於準則的矩陣 59
表A.9　餐飲服務提供商選擇於衛生(H)子準則的矩陣 59
表A.10　餐飲服務提供商選擇於餐飲的品質(QM)子準則的矩陣 59
表A.11　餐飲服務提供商選擇於服務的品質(QS)子準則的矩陣 60
表A.12　餐飲服務提供商選擇於餐飲衛生(HM)之選擇方案的矩陣 60
表A.13　餐飲服務提供商選擇於服務人員衛生(HSP)之選擇方案的矩陣 60
表A.14　餐飲服務提供商選擇於運輸工具的衛生(HSP)之選擇方案的矩陣 60
表A.15　餐飲服務提供商選擇於食物多變性(VM)之選擇方案的矩陣 61
表A.16　餐飲服務提供商選擇於食物搭配(CoM)之選擇方案的矩陣 61
表A.17　餐飲服務提供商選擇於食物卡路里(CaM)之選擇方案的矩陣 61
表A.18　餐飲服務提供商選擇於食物味道(TM)之選擇方案的矩陣 61
表A.19　餐飲服務提供商選擇於服務人員的態度(BSP)之選擇方案的矩陣 62
表A.20　餐飲服務提供商選擇於服務時間(ST)之選擇方案的矩陣 62
表A.21　餐飲服務提供商選擇於通信電話(CP)之選擇方案的矩陣 62
表A.22　餐飲服務提供商選擇於問題解決能力(PS)之選擇方案的矩陣 62



圖目錄

圖1.1　研究流程圖 6
圖2.1　AHP基本層級架構圖 10
圖5.1　抉選合夥的層級架構 35
圖5.2　投資選擇的層級架構 39
圖5.3　選擇餐飲提供商的層級架構 44

[1]呂建成，企業電子化策略方案評選之研究，大葉大學研究所碩士論文，2002。
[2]莊敏益，評估軍機商維市場外包進入策略之研究—應用層級分析法於某航太公司個案探討，大葉大學研究所碩士論文，2004。
[3]鄭書季，多目標模糊偏好規劃法求解AHP及ANP優先權重，暨南大學研究所碩士論文，2005。
[4]A. Arbel, Approximate articulatin of preference and priority derivation, European Journal of Operational Research 43 (1989) 317-326.
[5]J.J. Buckley, Fuzzy hierarchical analysis, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17 (1985) 233-247.
[6]J. J. Buckley, T. Feuring and Y. Hyashi, Fuzzy hierarchical analysis revisited, European Journal of Operational Research, 129 (2001) 48-64.
[7]B. Chandran, B. Golden, E. Wasil, Linear programming models for estimating weights in the analytic hierarchy process, Computers and Operations Research 32 (2005) 2235-2254.
[8]R. Islam, M.P. Biswal, S.S. Alam, Preference programming and inconsistent interval judgments, European Journal of Operational Research 97 (1997) 53-62.
[9]C. Kahraman, U. Cebeci, D. Ruan, Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: The case of Turkey, Int. J. Production Economics, 87 (2004) 171-184.
[10]T.C. Koopmans, An analysis of production as an efficient combination of activities, Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, T.C. Koopmans (ed.), Cowles Commission Monograph 13, Wiley, New York, 33-97, 1951.
[11]M. Kress, Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation – A comment, European Journal of Operational Research 52 (1991) 382-383.
[12]H.W. Kuhn, A.W. Tucker, Nonlinear programming, Proceeding of the Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistic and Probability, University of California Press, Berkeley, 481-491, 1951.
[13]H.L. Li, L.C. Ma, Detecting and adjusting ordinal and cardinal inconsistencies through a graphical and optimal approach in AHP models, Computers and Operations Research, in press (2006).
[14]E.S. Lee, R.J. Li, Fuzzy multiple objective programming and compromise programming with Pareto optimum, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 53 (1993) 275-288.
[15]L.C. Leung, D. Cao, On consistency and ranking of alternatives in fuzzy AHP, European Journal of Operational Research 124 (2000) 102-113.
[16]LINDO System Inc., Optimization Modeling with LINGO (Second Edition), 1998.
[17]L. Mikhailov, Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises, Omega 30 (2002) 393-401.
[18]L. Mikhailov, Deriving priorities from fuzzy pairwise comparison judgments, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 134 (2003) 365-385.
[19]L. Mikhailov, M.G. Singh, Fuzzy analytic network process and its application to the development of decision support systems, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cyperneics —PART C: Applications and Reviews 33 (2003) 33-41.
[20]L. Mikhailov, Evaluation of services using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, Applied Soft Computing 5 (2004) 23-33.
[21]L. Mikhailov, A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pirwise comparison judgments, European Journal of Operational Research 159 (2004) 687-704.
[22]X. Rouning, Z. Xiaoyan, Extensions of the analytic hierarchy process in fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 52 (1992) 251-257.
[23]A.A. Salo, R.P. Hämäiläinen, Ambiguous preference statements in the analytic hierarchy process, Research Report A39, System Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland, 1991.
[24]T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchical Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
[25]T.L. Saaty and L.G. Vargas, Uncertainty and ranking order in the analytic hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research 32 (1987) 107-117.
[26]K. Sugihara, H. Ishii, H. Tanaka, Fuzzy AHP with incomplete information, IFSA world congress and 20th NAFIPS International Conference 5 (2001) 2730-2733.
[27]K. Sugihara, H. Tanaka, Interval evaluations in the analytic hierarchy process by possibility analysis, International Journal of Computational Intelligence 17 (2001) 567-579.
[28]K. Sugihara, H. Ishii, H. Tanaka, Interval priorities in AHP by interval regression analysis, European Journal of Operational Research 158 (2004) 745-754.
[29]J. Von Neumann, O. Morgenstern, Theory of games and economic behavior, Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 1944.
[30]Y.M. Wang, J.B. Yang, D. L. Xu, A two-stage logarithmic goal programming method for generating weights from interval comparison matrices, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 152 (2005) 475-498.
[31]Y. M. Wang, J.B. Yang, D. L. Xu, Interval weight generation approaches besed on consistency test and interval comparison matrices, Applied Mathematics and Computation 167 (2005) 252-273.
[32]Y.M. Wang, On lexicographic goal programming method for generating weights from inconsistent interval comparison matrices, Applied mathematics and computation 173 (2006) 985-991.
[33]W. L. Winston, Operations Research Applications and Algorithms, Duxbury, New York, 1994.
[34]J.R Yu and S.J Cheng, An integrated method on deriving priorities in analytic network process, European Journal of Operational Research, Accepted (2006).
[35]H.J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy programming and linear programming with several objective function, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1 (1978) 45-56.