The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach
Abstract
This paper presents a summary of the discrete mathematical part of my work, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its generalization to dependence and feedback, the Analytic Network Process (ANP), for measuring tangible and intangible factors, particularly as applied to decision making. The factors of the decision are arranged in hierarchical or network structures and judgments are then made by the decision maker, or by an expert, about the dominant element for each pair with respect to a common property. From simple judgments on two elements at a time with respect to a common property, priority vectors are obtained that are combined throughout the structure to give the best outcome for a decision. The judgments may be inconsistent, and there is a mathematical way to measure inconsistency so that the outlying judgments may be revised by the decision maker in an acceptable way or a decision may be delayed until more consistent information is obtained. In practical applications using either hierarchical or network structures, decisions are often analyzed in separate parts for their benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks, and the results are then combined in an appropriate way into an overall synthesis of those priorities. The mathematics has been generalized in the literature to the Neural Network Process (NNP), the continuous case for modeling how the brain synthesizes signals. There has been a diversity of applications over the past 30 to 40 years, and some of these are reported here. A brief mention is made of other methods of decision making and how AHP/ANP may compare with them.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Zadeh, L. A. (1965) · Information and Control · doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-x · Cited by 67,855
Zadeh, L. A. (1996) · Cited by 46,844
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8 · Cited by 29,767
Theory of games and economic behavior
(2019) · 100 Years of Math Milestones · doi:10.1090/mbk/121/32 · Cited by 16,632
Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs.
Tsoukias, A., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1994) · The Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.2307/2584151 · Cited by 8,370
Theory of Games and Economic Behavior
Hawkins, D. (1945) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/286866 · Cited by 3,887
Decision making with dependence and feedback : the analytic network process
Saaty, T. L. (1996) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,356
Self-citationModels, Methods, Concepts & Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2012) · International Series in Operations Research & Management Science · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3597-6 · Cited by 2,210
Self-citationManagement Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming
Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1957) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.4.1.38 · Cited by 1,902
The Analytic Hierarchy Process—A Survey of the Method and its Applications
Zahedi, F. (1986) · Interfaces · doi:10.1287/inte.16.4.96 · Cited by 1,329
Cited by
Aleksić, A., Tadić, D., Komatina, N., & Nestić, S. (2025) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math13132216 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Saaty, T. L.
- Venue
- Operations Research
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1101-1118
- ISSN
- 0030-364X (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5463
- OpenAlex
- W2061016129
- Cited by
- 508
- References
- 38
- FWCI
- 24.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/opre.2013.1197
- The paper
- Saaty, T. L. (2013). The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach. Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2013.1197
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.