MGMLaboratory
Back

Menu

01Home
02About Us
03Projects
04Publications
05Member
06Articles
07Contact

Let's Talk

Open in Mail app

Socials

Malang (ID) --:--Privacy PolicyTerms of Service

January 31, 20182 min read

Three Ways to Rank a Restaurant List, ComparedThree Ways to Rank a Restaurant List, Compared

A study in Malang measured accuracy and computation time for AHP, Fuzzy AHP, and AHP TOPSIS on the same recommendation task.

  • Journal
  • Publications

Written by

  • SRShirasaka RenIT & Infrastructure · Student Member

In this article

  1. 01How the three methods differ
  2. 02Accuracy: Fuzzy AHP leads
  3. 03Time complexity: AHP TOPSIS wins

Picking where to eat sounds trivial until you have to automate it. A recommendation system has to weigh distance, price, and rating at the same time, then produce a ranked list fast enough to be useful on a phone screen.

A study from Brawijaya University compared three multi criteria methods on exactly that task, using 30 real cases from Malang, Indonesia. The methods were plain AHP, Fuzzy AHP, and AHP combined with TOPSIS.

01/03

How the three methods differ

AHP breaks a decision into a hierarchy of criteria and alternatives, then derives weights from pairwise comparisons. It is simple and widely used, but its accuracy depends on how consistently those comparisons are filled in.

Fuzzy AHP keeps the same structure but replaces crisp numbers with triangular fuzzy values. Judgments like fairly important or strongly important become ranges rather than single points, which softens the effect of subjective scoring.

AHP TOPSIS splits the job. AHP sets the criteria weights, then TOPSIS ranks the alternatives by their distance from an ideal solution. Its selling point is speed rather than accuracy.

An Indonesian rice dish served at a food court. Image: Gunawan Kartapranata, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Fig. 01An Indonesian rice dish served at a food court. Image: Gunawan Kartapranata, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

02/03

Accuracy: Fuzzy AHP leads

On the 30 test cases, plain AHP reached 30 percent accuracy. AHP TOPSIS improved that to 40 percent. Fuzzy AHP was clearly ahead at 66.67 percent, more than doubling the baseline.

The authors attribute the gain to the weighting step. Fuzzy values handle vagueness in human judgment better than fixed numbers, so the criteria weights land closer to what users actually mean.

03/03

Time complexity: AHP TOPSIS wins

On a phone, computation cost is a first class concern. AHP and Fuzzy AHP both grow on the order of mn squared, where m is the number of criteria and n the number of alternatives. AHP TOPSIS grows quadratically in n, and it came out fastest in a simulation with three criteria and 50 to 150 menu options.

A warung, a small Indonesian food stall. Image: Rafidaslam, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Fig. 02A warung, a small Indonesian food stall. Image: Rafidaslam, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The authors conclude that all three methods are workable for a mobile culinary app. The choice depends on what you are short of. If accuracy matters most, Fuzzy AHP is the pick. If the device is slow or the list is long, AHP TOPSIS is the safer bet.

Source

  1. Dewi et al. (2018). A Comparison Between AHP and Hybrid AHP for Mobile Based Culinary Recommendation System. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies.

    DOI10.3991/ijim.v12i1.7561 (opens in a new tab)

Next articleThe Hard Part of Chat Privacy Is the Key(Keep scrolling)(Read it next)(Loading)