Compositional analysis of archaeological glasses

At CoDaWork'03 we presented work on the analysis of archaeological glass composi- tional data. Such data typically consist of geochemical compositions involving 10-12 variables and approximates completely compositional data if the main component, sil- ica, is included. We suggested that what has been termed `crude' principal component analysis (PCA) of standardized data often identi ed interpretable pattern in the data more readily than analyses based on log-ratio transformed data (LRA). The funda- mental problem is that, in LRA, minor oxides with high relative variation, that may not be structure carrying, can dominate an analysis and obscure pattern associated with variables present at higher absolute levels. We investigate this further using sub- compositional data relating to archaeological glasses found on Israeli sites. A simple model for glass-making is that it is based on a `recipe' consisting of two `ingredients', sand and a source of soda. Our analysis focuses on the sub-composition of components associated with the sand source. A `crude' PCA of standardized data shows two clear compositional groups that can be interpreted in terms of di erent recipes being used at di erent periods, re ected in absolute di erences in the composition. LRA analysis can be undertaken either by normalizing the data or de ning a `residual'. In either case, after some `tuning', these groups are recovered. The results from the normalized LRA are di erently interpreted as showing that the source of sand used to make the glass di ered. These results are complementary. One relates to the recipe used. The other relates to the composition (and presumed sources) of one of the ingredients. It seems to be axiomatic in some expositions of LRA that statistical analysis of compositional data should focus on relative variation via the use of ratios. Our analysis suggests that absolute di erences can also be informative

Searching for consensus in ahp-group decision making. A bayesian perspective

This paper sets out to identify the initial positions of the different decision makers who intervene in a group decision making process with a reduced number of actors, and to establish possible consensus paths between these actors. As a methodological support, it employs one of the most widely-known multicriteria decision techniques, namely, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Assuming that the judgements elicited by the decision makers follow the so-called multiplicative model (Crawford and Williams, 1985; Altuzarra et al., 1997; Laininen and Hämäläinen, 2003) with log-normal errors and unknown variance, a Bayesian approach is used in the estimation of the relative priorities of the alternatives being compared. These priorities, estimated by way of the median of the posterior distribution and normalised in a distributive manner (priorities add up to one), are a clear example of compositional data that will be used in the search for consensus between the actors involved in the resolution of the problem through the use of Multidimensional Scaling tools

Group preference structures in AHP–group decision making

This paper presents a procedure that allows us to determine the preference structures (PS) associated to each of the different groups of actors that can be identified in a group decision making problem with a large number of individuals. To that end, it makes use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Saaty, 1980) as the technique to solve discrete multicriteria decision making problems. This technique permits the resolution of multicriteria, multienvironment and multiactor problems in which subjective aspects and uncertainty have been incorporated into the model, constructing ratio scales corresponding to the priorities relative to the elements being compared, normalised in a distributive manner (wi = 1). On the basis of the individuals’ priorities we identify different clusters for the decision makers and, for each of these, the associated preference structure using, to that end, tools analogous to those of Multidimensional Scaling. The resulting PS will be employed to extract knowledge for the subsequent negotiation processes and, should it be necessary, to determine the relative importance of the alternatives being compared using anyone of the existing procedures