AHP Calculator Skill | Agent Skills

AHP Calculator

Overview

The AHP Calculator skill implements the Analytic Hierarchy Process methodology for multi-criteria decision analysis. It enables systematic evaluation of alternatives through pairwise comparisons, consistency validation, and weight derivation, supporting both individual and group decision-making scenarios.

Capabilities

Pairwise comparison matrix creation
Eigenvalue-based weight calculation
Consistency ratio computation
Inconsistency identification and correction guidance
Group AHP aggregation (AIJ/AIP methods)
Sensitivity analysis on weights
AHP hierarchy visualization
Report generation

Used By Processes

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA)
Structured Decision Making Process
Decision Quality Assessment

Usage

AHP Scale

The standard Saaty scale for pairwise comparisons:

1: Equal importance
3: Moderate importance
5: Strong importance
7: Very strong importance
9: Extreme importance
2, 4, 6, 8: Intermediate values

Hierarchy Definition

# Define AHP hierarchy
hierarchy = {
    "goal": "Select Best Vendor",
    "criteria": [
        {
            "name": "Cost",
            "sub_criteria": ["Initial Cost", "Maintenance Cost"]
        },
        {
            "name": "Quality",
            "sub_criteria": ["Product Quality", "Service Quality"]
        },
        {
            "name": "Delivery",
            "sub_criteria": ["Lead Time", "Reliability"]
        }
    ],
    "alternatives": ["Vendor A", "Vendor B", "Vendor C"]
}

Pairwise Comparison Matrix

# Criteria comparison matrix
criteria_comparison = {
    "Cost": {"Cost": 1, "Quality": 3, "Delivery": 5},
    "Quality": {"Cost": 1/3, "Quality": 1, "Delivery": 3},
    "Delivery": {"Cost": 1/5, "Quality": 1/3, "Delivery": 1}
}

Consistency Analysis

The skill calculates:

Consistency Index (CI): (lambda_max - n) / (n - 1)
Consistency Ratio (CR): CI / RI (Random Index)
Acceptable threshold: CR < 0.10

Group Decision Making

Aggregation methods supported:

AIJ (Aggregation of Individual Judgments): Geometric mean of individual comparisons
AIP (Aggregation of Individual Priorities): Geometric mean of derived weights

Input Schema

{
  "hierarchy": {
    "goal": "string",
    "criteria": ["object"],
    "alternatives": ["string"]
  },
  "comparisons": {
    "criteria": "matrix",
    "sub_criteria": "object of matrices",
    "alternatives": "object of matrices"
  },
  "options": {
    "aggregation_method": "AIJ|AIP",
    "consistency_threshold": "number",
    "sensitivity_analysis": "boolean"
  }
}

Output Schema

{
  "weights": {
    "criteria": "object",
    "sub_criteria": "object",
    "alternatives": "object"
  },
  "global_weights": "object",
  "ranking": ["string"],
  "consistency": {
    "CR": "number",
    "is_consistent": "boolean",
    "inconsistent_comparisons": ["object"]
  },
  "sensitivity": {
    "critical_criteria": ["string"],
    "stability_intervals": "object"
  }
}

Best Practices

Limit criteria to 7-9 items per level (cognitive limit)
Always check consistency ratio before proceeding
Revisit inconsistent comparisons with stakeholders
Use geometric mean for group aggregation
Perform sensitivity analysis on close rankings
Document rationale for each pairwise comparison

Correction Guidance

When CR > 0.10, the skill identifies:

Most inconsistent judgments
Suggested adjustment directions
Impact of corrections on final weights

Integration Points

Connects with Stakeholder Preference Elicitor for data collection
Feeds into TOPSIS Ranker for hybrid analysis
Supports Decision Visualization for hierarchy diagrams
Integrates with Consistency Validator for quality assurance

Agent Skills: AHP Calculator

Install this agent skill to your local

Skill Files