Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,079

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 104 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements

Open access
Liu, Yan, Eckert, Claudia M., Earl, Christopher·2020·Expert Systems with Applications
DOI 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a broadly applied multi-criteria decision-making method to determine the weights of criteria and priorities of alternatives in a structured manner based on pairwise comparison. As subjective judgments during comparison might be imprecise, fuzzy sets have been combined with AHP. This is referred to as fuzzy AHP or FAHP. An increasing amount of papers are published which describe different ways to derive the weights/priorities from a fuzzy comparison matrix, but seldomly set out the relative benefits of each approach so that the choice of the approach seems arbitrary. A review of various fuzzy AHP techniques is required to guide both academic and industrial experts to choose suitable techniques for a specific practical context. This paper reviews the literature published since 2008 where fuzzy AHP is applied to decision-making problems in industry, particularly the various selection problems. The techniques are categorised by the four aspects of developing a fuzzy AHP model: (i) representation of the relative importance for pairwise comparison, (ii) aggregation of fuzzy sets for group decisions and weights/priorities, (iii) defuzzification of a fuzzy set to a crisp value for final comparison, and (iv) consistency measurement of the judgements. These techniques are discussed in terms of their underlying principles, origins, strengths and weakness. Summary tables and specification charts are provided to guide the selection of suitable techniques. Tips for building a fuzzy AHP model are also included and six open questions are posed for future work.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 104 references

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. Aguarón, 2003, The geometric consistency index: Approximated thresholds, European Journal of Operational Research, 147, 137, 10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00255-2 · doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(02)00255-2
  2. Alaqeel, 2018, A fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process algorithm to prioritize Smart Grid technologies for the Saudi electricity infrastructure, Sustainable Energy, Grids and Networks, 13, 122, 10.1016/j.segan.2017.12.010 · doi:10.1016/j.segan.2017.12.010
  3. Alinezad, 2013, Supplier evaluation and selection with QFD and FAHP in a pharmaceutical company, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 68, 355, 10.1007/s00170-013-4733-3 · doi:10.1007/s00170-013-4733-3
  4. Avikal, 2014, A Fuzzy AHP and PROMETHEE method-based heuristic for disassembly line balancing problems, International Journal of Production Research, 52, 1306, 10.1080/00207543.2013.831999 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.831999
  5. Ayag, 2010, A combined fuzzy AHP-simulation approach to CAD software selection, International Journal of General Systems, 39, 731, 10.1080/03081079.2010.495190 · doi:10.1080/03081079.2010.495190
  6. Aydin, 2010, Multiattribute supplier selection using fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 3, 553
  7. Ayodele, 2018, A multi-criteria GIS based model for wind farm site selection using interval type-2 fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: The case study of Nigeria, Applied Energy, 228, 1853, 10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.07.051 · doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.07.051
  8. Büyüközkan, 2017, RFID service provider selection: An integrated fuzzy MCDM approach, Measurement, 112, 88, 10.1016/j.measurement.2017.08.018 · doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2017.08.018
  9. Balusa, 2018, Sensitivity analysis of fuzzy-analytic hierarchical process (FAHP) decision-making model in selection of underground metal mining method, Journal of Sustainable Mining
  10. Ban, 2012, Nearest interval, triangular and trapezoidal approximation of a fuzzy number preserving ambiguity, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 53, 805, 10.1016/j.ijar.2012.02.001 · doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2012.02.001
  11. Baysal, 2015, A two phased fuzzy methodology for selection among municipal projects, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 21, 405, 10.3846/20294913.2014.909902 · doi:10.3846/20294913.2014.909902
  12. Budak, 2015, Fuzzy decision making model for selection of real time location systems, Applied Soft Computing, 36, 177, 10.1016/j.asoc.2015.05.057 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.05.057
  13. Calabrese, 2013, Using Fuzzy AHP to manage Intellectual Capital assets: An application to the ICT service industry, Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 3747, 10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.081 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.081
  14. Celik, 2018, An interval type-2 fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods for decision-making problems in maritime transportation engineering: The case of ship loader, Ocean Engineering, 155, 371, 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.039 · doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.01.039
  15. Yücenur, 2011, Supplier selection problem in global supply chains by AHP and ANP approaches under fuzzy environment, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 56, 823, 10.1007/s00170-011-3220-y · doi:10.1007/s00170-011-3220-y
  16. Chen, 2011, An MAGDM based on constrained FAHP and FTOPSIS and its application to supplier selection, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 54, 2802, 10.1016/j.mcm.2011.06.068 · doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2011.06.068
  17. Chen, 1998, Aggregating fuzzy opinions in the group decision-making environment, Journal of Cybernetics, 29, 363
  18. Wang Chen, 2016, A fuzzy MCDM approach for green supplier selection from the economic and environmental aspects, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2016, 1, 10.1155/2016/8097386 · doi:10.1155/2016/8097386
  19. Demirtaş, 2014, Selecting e-Purse smart card technology via Fuzzy AHP and ANP, Journal of Applied Mathematics., 10.1155/2014/619030 · doi:10.1155/2014/619030
  20. Ertay, 2011, An integrated multi-criteria group decision-making approach to efficient supplier selection and clustering using fuzzy preference relations, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 24, 1152, 10.1080/0951192X.2011.615342 · doi:10.1080/0951192x.2011.615342
  21. Facchinetti, 1998, Note on ranking fuzzy triangular numbers, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 13, 613, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-111X(199807)13:7<613::AID-INT2>3.0.CO;2-N · doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-111x(199807)13:7<613::aid-int2>3.0.co;2-n
  22. García-Cascales, 2012, Evaluation of photovoltaic cells in a multi-criteria decision making process, Annals of Operations Research, 199, 373, 10.1007/s10479-011-1009-x · doi:10.1007/s10479-011-1009-x
  23. Ghorbani, 2013, A novel approach for supplier selection based on the Kano model and fuzzy MCDM, International Journal of Production Research, 51, 5469, 10.1080/00207543.2013.784403 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.784403
  24. Hashemian, 2014, A fuzzy hybrid group decision support system approach for the supplier evaluation process, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 73, 1105, 10.1007/s00170-014-5843-2 · doi:10.1007/s00170-014-5843-2
  25. Ic, 2013, Development of a decision support system for robot selection, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 29, 142, 10.1016/j.rcim.2012.11.008 · doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2012.11.008
  26. Jung, 2011, A fuzzy AHP–GP approach for integrated production-planning considering manufacturing partners, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 5833, 10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.039 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.039
  27. Kahraman, 2010, Selection among ERP outsourcing alternatives using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision making methodology, International Journal of Production Research, 48, 547, 10.1080/00207540903175095 · doi:10.1080/00207540903175095
  28. Karsak, 2016, Taxonomy and review of non-deterministic analytical methods for supplier selection, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 29, 263, 10.1080/0951192X.2014.1003410 · doi:10.1080/0951192x.2014.1003410
  29. Khorasani, 2018, Green supplier evaluation by using the integrated Fuzzy AHP model and Fuzzy Copras, Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 2, 17, 10.1007/s41660-017-0027-9 · doi:10.1007/s41660-017-0027-9
  30. Kilic, 2014, Development of a hybrid methodology for ERP system selection: The case of Turkish airlines, Decision Support Systems, 66, 82, 10.1016/j.dss.2014.06.011 · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2014.06.011
  31. Kilincci, 2011, Fuzzy AHP approach for supplier selection in a washing machine company, Expert Systems with Applications, 38, 9656, 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.159 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.159
  32. Kim, 1990, Ranking fuzzy numbers with index of optimism, Fuzzy Sets & Systems, 35, 143, 10.1016/0165-0114(90)90189-D · doi:10.1016/0165-0114(90)90189-d
  33. Kuo, 2002, A decision support system for selecting convenience store location through integration of fuzzy AHP and artificial neural network, Computers in Industry, 47, 199, 10.1016/S0166-3615(01)00147-6 · doi:10.1016/s0166-3615(01)00147-6
  34. Kuo, 2010, Developing a supplier selection system through integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy DEA a case study on an auto lighting system company in Taiwan, Production Planning and Control, 21, 468, 10.1080/09537280903458348 · doi:10.1080/09537280903458348
  35. Lee, 2009, A fuzzy supplier selection model with the consideration of benefits, opportunities, costs and risks, Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 2879, 10.1016/j.eswa.2008.01.045 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.01.045
  36. Liu, 2019, A fuzzy decision tool to evaluate the sustainable performance of suppliers in an agrifood value chain, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 127, 196, 10.1016/j.cie.2018.12.022 · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.12.022
  37. Mahmoudzadeh, 2013, A new method for consistency test in fuzzy AHP, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 25, 457
  38. Mikhailov, 2004, Evaluation of services using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, Applied Soft Computing Journal, 5, 23, 10.1016/j.asoc.2004.04.001 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2004.04.001
  39. Mikhailov, 2004, A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements, European Journal of Operational Research, 159, 687, 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00432-6 · doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00432-6
  40. Nguyen, 2015, An integrated approach of fuzzy linguistic preference based AHP and Fuzzy COPRAS for machine tool evaluation, PLoS ONE, 10, 10.1371/journal.pone.0133599 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133599
  41. Onut, 2010, A theorical model design for ERP software selection process under the constraints of cost and quality: A fuzzy approach, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 21, 365
  42. Opricovic, 2003, Defuzzification within a multicriteria decision model, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 11, 635, 10.1142/S0218488503002387 · doi:10.1142/s0218488503002387
  43. Parameshwaran, 2015, An integrated fuzzy MCDM based approach for robot selection considering objective and subjective criteria, Applied Soft Computing, 26, 31, 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.09.025 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.09.025
  44. Görener, 2017, A hybrid type-2 fuzzy based supplier performance evaluation methodology: The Turkish Airlines technic case, Applied Soft Computing, 56, 436, 10.1016/j.asoc.2017.03.026 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2017.03.026
  45. Rezaei, 2014, Supplier selection in the airline retail industry using a funnel methodology: Conjunctive screening method and fuzzy AHP, Expert Systems with Applications, 41, 8165, 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.005 · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2014.07.005
  46. Roshandel, 2013, Evaluating and selecting the supplier in detergent production industry using hierarchical fuzzy TOPSIS, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37, 10170, 10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.043 · doi:10.1016/j.apm.2013.05.043
  47. Sarfaraz, 2012, Evaluating ERP implementation choices on the basis of customisation using fuzzy AHP, International Journal of Production Research, 50, 7057, 10.1080/00207543.2012.654409 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2012.654409
  48. Shad, 2014, Integration of QFD, AHP, and LPP methods in supplier development problems under uncertainty, Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 10, 10.1007/s40092-014-0051-0 · doi:10.1007/s40092-014-0051-0
  49. Shakourloo, 2016, A new model for more effective supplier selection and remanufacturing process in a closed-loop supply chain, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 40, 9914, 10.1016/j.apm.2016.06.039 · doi:10.1016/j.apm.2016.06.039
  50. Singh, 2018, Selection of warehouse location for a global supply chain: A case study, IIMB Management Review., 10.1016/j.iimb.2018.08.009 · doi:10.1016/j.iimb.2018.08.009
  51. Sultana, 2015, An integrated approach for multiple criteria supplier selection combining Fuzzy Delphi, Fuzzy AHP & Fuzzy TOPSIS, Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 29, 1273
  52. Taha, 2011, A fuzzy AHP–ANN-based decision support system for machine tool selection in a flexible manufacturing cell, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 57, 719, 10.1007/s00170-011-3323-5 · doi:10.1007/s00170-011-3323-5
  53. Tavana, 2020, An integrated fuzzy AHP-fuzzy MULTIMOORA model for supply chain risk-benefit assessment and supplier selection, International Journal of Systems Science: Operations & Logistics, 1
  54. Uygun, 2015, An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 86, 137, 10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.014 · doi:10.1016/j.cie.2014.09.014
  55. Vahidnia, 2009, Hospital site selection using fuzzy AHP and its derivatives, Journal of Environment Management, 90, 3048, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.04.010 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.04.010
  56. Viswanadham, 2013, Supplier selection based on supply chain ecosystem, performance and risk criteria, International Journal of Production Research, 51, 6484, 10.1080/00207543.2013.825056 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.825056
  57. Wang, 2014, Combining fuzzy AHP and fuzzy Kano to optimize product varieties for smart cameras: A zero-one integer programming perspective, Applied Soft Computing, 22, 410, 10.1016/j.asoc.2014.04.013 · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2014.04.013
  58. Yazdani-Chamzini, 2012, Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) selection using fuzzy multicriteria decision making methods, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 30, 194, 10.1016/j.tust.2012.02.021 · doi:10.1016/j.tust.2012.02.021
  59. Yeh, 2008, On improving trapezoidal and triangular approximations of fuzzy numbers, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 48, 297, 10.1016/j.ijar.2007.09.004 · doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2007.09.004
  60. Yeh, 2017, Existence of interval, triangular, and trapezoidal approximations of fuzzy numbers under a general condition, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 310, 1, 10.1016/j.fss.2016.03.013 · doi:10.1016/j.fss.2016.03.013
  61. Zhu, 1999, A discussion on extent analysis method and applications of fuzzy AHP, European journal of operational research, 116, 450, 10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00331-2 · doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(98)00331-2

Cited by

See all 1,079

Metadata

Authors
Liu, Y., Eckert, C. M., & Earl, C.
Venue
Expert Systems with Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-12
Volume
161
Pages
113738
ISSN
0957-4174 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738
OpenAlex
W3045457574
Cited by
1,079
References
104
FWCI
72.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
  • www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
  • www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
Funders
  • Education Department of Jilin Province
  • Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738
The paper
Liu, Y., Eckert, C. M., & Earl, C. (2020). A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements. Expert Systems with Applications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.