## Efficiency of the singular vector of a reciprocal matrix and comparison to the Perron vector

Susana Furtado ∗† CEAFEL and Faculdade de Economia Universidade do Porto Rua Dr. Roberto Frias 4200-464 Porto, Portugal

Charles R. Johnson ‡ Department of Mathematics College of William and Mary Williamsburg, VA 23187-8795

September 4, 2024

## Abstract

In models using pair-wise (ratio) comparisons among alternatives (reciprocal matrices A ) to deduce a cardinal ranking vector, the right Perron eigenvector was traditionally used, though several other options have emerged. We propose and motivate another alternative, the left singular vector (Perron eigenvector of AA T ). Theory is developed. We show that for reciprocal matrices obtained from consistent matrices by modifying one column, and the corresponding row, the cone generated by the columns is efficient, implying that the Perron vector and the left singular vector of such matrices are always efficient.

∗ Email: sbf@fep.up.pt The work of this author was supported by FCT- Funda¸ c˜o para a a Ciˆncia e Tecnologia, under project UIDB/04721/2020. e

‡ Email: crjohn@wm.edu.

† Corresponding author.

In addition, the two vectors are compared empirically for random matrices. With regard to efficiency, the left singular vector consistently outperforms the right Perron eigenvector, though both perform well for large numbers of alternatives.

Keywords : column perturbed consistent matrix, decision analysis, efficient vector, Perron eigenvector, reciprocal matrix, singular vector. MSC2020 : 90B50, 91B06, 15A18, 15B48

## 1 Introduction

An n -byn positive matrix A = [ a ij ] is called reciprocal if a ji = 1 a ij for every pair 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n . The diagonal entries are all 1. We denote the set of such matrices by PC n . Reciprocal matrices A ∈ PC n arise as an array of pairwise (ratio) comparisons among n alternatives. In this context, typically a cardinal ranking vector is to be extracted from A for decision problems about business alternatives [3, 9, 10, 12, 17, 20, 22, 25]; and other applications, in voting theory and currency exchange rates, are emerging. Historically, the (right) Perron eigenvector of A has been used for this vector of weights, as suggested in [23, 24]. However, many natural concerns about this choice have emerged (see, for example, [21]). Here, we suggest an entirely new, but natural alternative, the Perron eigenvector of AA , T sometimes called the left singular vector of A, as it is the left singular vector of A associated with the largest singular value.

The comparisons embodied in a reciprocal A are consistent ( a ik = a ij a jk for all 1 ≤ i, j, k ≤ n ) if and only if, for some positive n -vector w, A = ww ( -T ) (in which w ( -T ) denotes the entry-wise inverse of the transpose of w ). In this case w is the only natural weight vector (up to a factor of scale), but consistency is unlikely in independent pair-wise comparisons. One agreeable criterion to be a weight vector w is that the consistent matrix built from w , W = ww ( -T ) , be a Pareto optimal approximation to A. This means that, if | A -V | ≤ | A -W , | absolute value entry-wise, in which V = vv ( -T ) for a positive vector v , then v is proportional to w. In this literature, such a positive vector w is called efficient (for A ). However, when A is inconsistent, there will be infinitely many, projectively distinct efficient vectors. Denote by E ( A ) the collection of all vectors efficient for A. It is now known that every column of A is efficient [14], the entry-wise geometric convex hull of

the columns [15] and, in particular, the simple entry-wise geometric mean of all the columns [5], are efficient. However, the Perron vector is not always efficient [6, 16]. A graph characterization of efficiency was given in [5] (see also [15]). Several other developments on efficiency have appeared (see, for example, [1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 11, 13]).

Since the definition of efficiency for A ∈ PC n involves rank 1 approximation to A , and the best rank 1 approximation (in the Frobenius norm) is the normalized outer product of the right and left singular vectors of A (associated with the spectral norm) [19] , it seems natural to test one of these for efficiency. Of course, the best rank 1 approximation is not usually reciprocal, let alone consistent.

Here, we primarily compare the left singular vector of A ∈ PC n (i.e. the Perron vector of AA T ) to the Perron eigenvector under the lens of efficiency. In the next section we amass the technical background that we need. Then, in Section 3, we develop some additional technology for understanding efficiency. In particular, it is noted that, in the event that E ( A ) is convex, both the singular vector and the Perron vector are efficient. In Section 4 we give a unified proof that, among column perturbed consistent matrices, both vectors are always efficient. Convexity of E ( A ) occurs when A lies in the class of simple perturbed consistent matrices introduced in [1] (see also [8]), but unfortunately it is not yet known in general for which A E ( A ) is convex. In Section 5, we accumulate considerable information comparing the two vectors, via simulation. The singular vector performs better than the Perron eigenvector in all dimensions n &gt; 3, both are more frequently efficient the higher the dimension (approaching efficiency with probability 1), and more detailed comparison is presented. We give some final remarks in Section 6.

## 2 Background

The set PC n is closed under monomial similarity, that is, similarity via a product of a permutation matrix and a positive diagonal matrix (monomial matrix) [14]. Fortunately, such transformation interfaces with efficient vectors in a natural way.

Lemma 1 [14] Suppose that A ∈ PC n and w ∈ E ( A . ) If S is an n -byn monomial matrix, then Sw ∈ E ( SAS -1 ) .

Given A = [ a ij ] ∈ PC n and a positive vector

$$\ w = \left [ \ w _ { 1 } \ \cdots \ \ w _ { n } \ \right ] ^ { T },$$

̸

define G A,w ( ) as the directed graph (digraph) with vertex set { 1 , . . . , n } and a directed edge i → j if and only if w i ≥ a ij w j , i = j.

In [5] the authors proved that the efficiency of w can be determined using G A,w ( ). In [15] a shorter matricial proof of this result has been given.

̸

Theorem 2 [5] Let A ∈ PC n . A positive n -vector w is efficient for A if and only if G A,w ( ) is a strongly connected digraph, that is, for all pairs of vertices i, j, with i = j, there is a directed path from i to j in G A,w ( ) .

We recall that the (right) Perron eigenvector of an n -byn positive matrix A is a (right) eigenvector of A associated with the spectral radius ρ A ( ) of A (called the Perron eigenvalue of A ) [18]. It is known that, up to a constant factor, all its entries are positive and, with some normalization, as having the sum of the entries equal to 1 , it is unique.

If a positive matrix has rank 1 , then any column is a Perron vector of the matrix (all the other projectively distinct eigenvectors are associated with the eigenvalue 0). When A is consistent, A = ww ( -T ) , any column of A, and of AA , T is a multiple of w. Thus, the Perron vectors of A and AA T (as any column) are projectively equal to w and, thus, are efficient vectors for A. Here, we focus upon the efficiency of the Perron eigenvector of AA T for a reciprocal matrix A. Note that, since AA T is symmetric, its right and left Perron vectors coincide.

We denote by C ( A ) the (convex) cone generated by the columns of A , that is, the set of nonzero, nonnegative linear combinations of the columns of A . Note that, according to our definition, 0 is not in C ( A ). It is important to note that both the right Perron vector of A and the Perron vector of AA T lie in C ( A . )

Lemma 3 For any positive n -byn matrix A (in particular, A ∈ PC n ), both the right Perron eigenvector of A and the Perron eigenvector of AA T lie in C ( A . )

Proof. If Av = ρ A v, v ( ) may be taken to be entry-wise positive. So Av lies in C ( A , ) and since v is proportional to Av, via the positive number ρ A , ( )

v ∈ C ( A ) also. If AA u T = ρ AA ( T ) u , since AA T is positive, ρ AA ( T ) is positive and u may be taken to be positive. Now, A u T is positive so that A A u ( T ) ∈ C ( A , ) and, as u is proportional, via ρ AA ( T ) , u ∈ C ( A ) also.

Two simple lemmas will be helpful.

Lemma 4 Let A and S be n -byn matrices, with S monomial. If C ( A ) is the cone generated by the columns of A then S C ( A ) is the cone generated by the columns of SAS -1 .

Proof. It is enough to show that C ( SAS -1 ) ⊆ S C ( A , ) as then applying this result to A instead of SAS -1 we get the other inclusion. Let S = DP, in which D = diag( λ , . . . , λ 1 n ) is a positive diagonal matrix and P is a permutation matrix (the proof is similar if S = PD ). Let a i and a ′ i denote the i th columns of A and A ′ = SAS -1 , respectively, i = 1 , . . . , n. Let x , . . . , x 1 n ≥ 0 (not all 0) . Then,

$$x _ { 1 } a _ { 1 } ^ { \prime } + \dots + x _ { n } a _ { n } ^ { \prime } = S \left ( \frac { x _ { 1 } } { \lambda _ { 1 } } a _ { \sigma ( 1 ) } + \dots + \frac { x _ { n } } { \lambda _ { n } } a _ { \sigma ( n ) } \right ) \in S \mathcal { C } ( A ),$$

where σ is the permutation of { 1 , . . . , n } associated with P T .

Lemma 5 If C is a convex subset of R n , and S is an n -byn real matrix, then S C is also convex.

Proof. Let Sw ,Sw 1 2 be arbitrary vectors in S C . Let λ , λ 1 2 &gt; 0 summing to 1 . Since w , w 1 2 ∈ C and C is convex, λ w 1 1 + λ w 2 2 ∈ C . Then, λ Sw 1 1 + λ Sw 2 2 = S λ w ( 1 1 + λ w 2 2 ) ∈ S C .

Corollary 6 Let A ∈ PC n and S be an n -byn monomial matrix. Then, E ( A ) is convex if and only if E ( SAS -1 ) is convex.

Proof. By Lemma 1, E ( SAS -1 ) = S E ( A . ) Thus, by Lemma 5, E ( A ) convex implies E ( SAS -1 ) convex. The converse follows similarly.

## 3 Efficiency and the cone generated by the columns of a reciprocal matrix

The cone generated by the columns of A ∈ PC n may or may not be contained in E ( A ). But it is quite helpful when it is.

Theorem 7 Let A ∈ PC n and suppose that C ( A ) ⊆ E ( A ) . Then, both the Perron vector of AA T and the right Perron vector of A lie in E ( A . ) Moreover, C ( AA T ) ⊆ E ( A . )

Proof. By Lemma 3, both the right Perron eigenvector of A and the Perron eigenvector of AA T lie in C ( A , ) so that the first claim follows. The second claim is a consequence of the fact that C ( AA T ) ⊆ C ( A ).

Recall that each column of A ∈ PC n lies in E ( A ). So, if E ( A ) is convex, C ( A ) ⊆ E ( A . )

Corollary 8 Let A ∈ PC n and suppose that E ( A ) is convex. Then, both the Perron vector of AA T and the right Perron vector of A lie in E ( A . )

In Theorem 7, we have identified a situation ( C ( A ) contained in E ( A )) in which both the left singular vector and the Perron vector of a reciprocal matrix are efficient for the matrix. If n = 3 , this situation always occurs since E ( A ) is necessarily convex, as we shall see. However, for any n &gt; 3 , there exists A ∈ PC n such that C ( A ) is not contained in E ( A , ) in which case E ( A ) is not convex. Any A with inefficient right Perron vector establishes this (and this situation may occur for any n ≥ 4 [6, 16]). When C ( A ) is not contained in E ( A , ) either or both the Perron vector of AA T or the right Perron vector of A (or none) may lie in E ( A ).

Example 9 Consider the reciprocal matrix

$$A = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c c } 1 & 1. 1 7 4 2 & 0. 5 6 4 7 & 4. 4 9 1 2 & 0. 3 6 3 3 \\ 0. 8 5 1 6 & 1 & 1. 4 1 9 8 & 0. 7 3 4 & 0. 8 4 4 4 \\ 1. 7 7 0 9 & 0. 7 0 4 3 & 1 & 1. 3 3 5 8 & 1. 7 3 5 6 \\ 0. 2 2 2 7 & 1. 3 6 2 4 & 0. 7 4 8 6 & 1 & 5. 4 4 6 7 \\ 2. 7 5 2 5 & 1. 1 8 4 3 & 0. 5 7 6 2 & 0. 1 8 3 6 & 1 \end{array} \right ].$$

The Perron eigenvectors of A and AA T are, respectively, w = [ 1 4008 . 0 8134 . 1 1503 . 1 3488 . 1 ] T and v = [ 1 4667 . 0 8522 . 1 3142 . 2 2704 . 1 ] T . The vector w is not efficient for A, while v is.

## Example 10 Consider the reciprocal matrix

$$A = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c c c } 1 & 1. 6 1 1 9 & 1. 1 8 5 5 & 2. 1 4 1 3 & 2. 6 1 2 4 \\ 0. 6 2 0 4 & 1 & 1. 6 3 3 8 & 3. 7 7 6 7 & 2. 1 3 7 6 \\ 0. 8 4 3 5 & 0. 6 1 2 1 & 1 & 0. 2 3 4 7 & 4. 6 4 8 8 \\ 0. 4 6 7 0 & 0. 2 6 4 8 & 4. 2 6 0 8 & 1 & 0. 2 4 6 2 \\ 0. 3 8 2 8 & 0. 4 6 7 8 & 0. 2 1 5 1 & 4. 0 6 1 7 & 1 \end{array} \right ].$$

The Perron eigenvectors of A and AA T are, respectively, w = [ 1 4842 . 1 5318 . 1 1940 . 1 0829 . 1 ] T and v = [ 1 1507 . 1 3620 . 1 0590 . 0 7746 . 1 ] T . The vector w is efficient for A, while v is not.

## Example 11 Consider the reciprocal matrix

$$A = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c c } 1 & 1. 2 7 6 7 & 0. 5 3 8 2 & 1. 9 5 2 2 & 0. 2 4 8 6 \\ 0. 7 8 3 3 & 1 & 0. 5 5 2 1 & 0. 2 7 9 3 & 2. 2 0 8 8 \\ 1. 8 5 8 & 1. 8 1 1 3 & 1 & 1. 5 4 & 1. 1 0 9 3 \\ 0. 5 1 2 2 & 3. 5 8 0 4 & 0. 6 4 9 3 5 & 1 & 0. 7 8 8 7 \\ 4. 0 2 2 5 & 0. 4 5 2 7 & 0. 9 0 1 5 & 1. 2 6 7 9 & 1 \end{array} \right ].$$

.

The Perron eigenvectors of A and AA T are, respectively, w = [ 0 6713 . 0 7041 . 0 9907 . 0 8591 . 1 ] T and v = [ 0 6131 . 0 5337 . 0 8907 . 0 8152 . 1 ] T . Both vectors w and v are not efficient for A .

Note that, from Theorem 7, in Examples 9, 10 and 11 C ( A ) is not contained in E ( A . )

## Example 12 Consider the reciprocal matrix

$$A = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c c c } 1 & 0. 4 2 4 5 & 0. 2 1 & 1. 0 1 8 6 & 0. 7 8 1 4 \\ 2. 3 5 5 6 & 1 & 0. 0 1 6 8 & 5. 6 9 7 4 & 0. 9 1 0 7 \\ 4. 7 6 1 9 & 5 9. 5 2 4 & 1 & 0. 4 9 1 3 & 0. 1 8 7 7 \\ 0. 9 8 1 7 & 0. 1 7 5 5 & 2. 0 3 5 4 & 1 & 1. 5 8 5 5 \\ 1. 2 7 9 8 & 1. 0 9 8 1 & 5. 3 2 7 7 & 0. 6 3 0 7 & 1 \end{array} \right ].$$

The Perron eigenvectors of A and AA T are, respectively, w = [ 0 1623 . 0 3658 . 1 9915 . 0 5080 . 1 ] T and v = [ 0 3988 . 0 9565 . 45 6075 . 0 2369 . 1 ] T .

Both vectors w and v are efficient for A . However w + v is not efficient for A, showing that C ( A ) is not contained in E ( A . )

## 4 Column perturbed consistent matrices

A ∈ PC n is called a column perturbed consistent matrix if A has a consistent ( n -1)-by-( n -1) principal submatrix or, in other words, if A is a reciprocal matrix obtained from a consistent matrix by modifying one column and the corresponding row. (Of course, if a column perturbed consistent matrix has rank 1, it is consistent.) Since an ( n -1)-by-( n -1) consistent matrix is positive diagonal similar to the matrix J n -1 of all 1's, and the columns of A may be permuted to be in any desired order, it follows that A is monomially similar to a matrix of the form

$$\begin{bmatrix} & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &  & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & && & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \ & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & - & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &
 & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &. & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & } & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & _ & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & + & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &, & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & = & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ^ & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & b & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

 & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &	 & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &$$

with x 1 ≥ · · · ≥ x n -1 &gt; 0 .

Theorem 13 Suppose that A ∈ PC n is a column perturbed consistent matrix. Then, C ( A ) ⊆ E ( A . )

Proof. Taking into account Lemmas 1 and Lemma 4, we may assume that A has the form (1) with x 1 ≥ · · · ≥ x n -1 &gt; 0 . Consider the linear combination of the columns of A w : = As, with

$$s = \left [ \begin{array} { c } s _ { 1 } \\ \vdots \\ s _ { n - 1 } \\ s _ { n } \end{array} \right ],$$

s i ≥ 0 , i = 1 , . . . , n (not all 0) . Wewant to see that w ∈ E ( A , ) or, equivalently, by Theorem 2, that G A,w ( ) is strongly connected. Let ww ( -T ) -A = [ b ij ] . We will show that b i,i +1 ≥ 0 for i = 1 , . . . , n -1 , and b n, 1 ≥ 0 , implying that

$$1 \rightarrow 2 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow n \rightarrow 1$$

is a cycle in G A,w ( ), and, thus, G A,w ( ) is strongly connected. Let a T denote the i th row of A. For i = 1 , . . . , n -2 , we have

i

$$b _ { i, i + 1 } & = \left ( a _ { i } ^ { T } s \right ) \left ( a _ { i + 1 } ^ { T } s \right ) ^ { ( - 1 ) } - 1 \\ & = \frac { s _ { 1 } + \cdots + s _ { n - 1 } + x _ { i } s _ { n } } { s _ { 1 } + \cdots + s _ { n - 1 } + x _ { i + 1 } s _ { n } } - 1 \\ & = \frac { s _ { n } ( x _ { i } - x _ { i + 1 } ) } { s _ { 1 } + \cdots + s _ { n - 1 } + x _ { i + 1 } s _ { n } } \geq 0.$$

We also have

$$\text{ve also have} \\ b _ { n - 1, n } & = \left ($$

Finally,

$$& f, \\ & b _ { n, 1 } = \left ( a _ { n } ^$$

Corollary 14 If A ∈ PC n is a column perturbed consistent matrix, then both the Perron vector of AA T and the right Perron vector of A lie in E ( A . )

Proof. Applying Theorems 7 and 13, gives the desired conclusion.

The efficiency of the Perron vector of a column perturbed consistent matrix was obtained in [16], but this gives a unified and simpler proof.

It may happen that, for a column perturbed consistent matrix A ∈ PC n , we have that E ( A ) is not convex. For this to happen it must be that n &gt; 3 , as we shall see after the next example.

## Example 15 Let

$$A = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c c c c } 1 & 1 &$$

$$q = \left [ \begin{array} { c c c$$

Let and

$$\begin{array} {$$

$$p = \left [ \begin{array} {$$

The vectors p and q are efficient for A. However, p + q is not efficient for A, implying that E ( A ) is not convex.

A reciprocal matrix A ∈ PC n that is obtained from a consistent matrix by changing two entries in symmetrically placed positions is a particular case of a column perturbed consistent matrix, and was called in [1, 8] a simple perturbed consistent matrix . Thus, as a consequence of Theorem 13, C ( A ) ⊆ E ( A , ) implying that the Perron vector of AA T and of A are efficient. This gives a much simpler proof of the known efficiency of the Perron vector of A [1, 8]. We note that any 3-by-3 reciprocal matrix is a simple perturbed consistent matrix [14].

A simple perturbed consistent matrix A ∈ PC n is monomial similar to a matrix, say S n ( x 1 ) , as in (1), with x 1 ≥ 1 and x 2 = · · · = x n -1 = 1 . The efficient vectors w for S n ( x 1 ) were described in [8]. Then, by Lemma 1, the efficient vectors for A may be obtained.

Lemma 16 [8] Let n ≥ 3 and x ≥ 1 . Let w = [ w 1 · · · w n -1 w n ] T be a positive n -vector. Then w is efficient for S n ( x ) ∈ PC n if and only if

$$w _ { n } \leq w _ { i } \leq w _ { 1 } \leq x w _$$

Theorem 17 If A ∈ PC n is a simple perturbed consistent matrix then E ( A ) is convex.

Proof. Taking into account Corollary 6, we may assume that A = S n ( x ) with x ≥ 1 . Since a vector w in E ( A ) is defined by a finite set of linear inequalities on its (positive) entries, as described in Lemma 16, it follows that E ( A ) is convex.

The cone C ( A ) may be properly contained in E ( A , ) even when E ( A ) is convex, as we next illustrate.

Example 18 For the simple perturbed consistent matrix S 5 (4) ∈ PC 5 , the vector [ 4 2 3 4 1 ] T is efficient for A and is not in C ( A ) , as the middle entries are distinct.

## 5 Empirical efficiency of the singular vector and the right Perron vector

For each n ≤ 25 , we generate n -byn matrices A i ∈ PC n , i = 1 , . . . 10000, as follows. We first generate an n -byn matrix C i with entries from a uniform distribution in (0 1 . , 15) and then construct the matrix A i as C i ◦ C ( -T ) i , in which ◦ denotes the Hadamard product and C ( -T ) i denotes the transpose of the entrywise inverse of C . i For each n, we count the number of matrices A i for which the Perron vectors of A i and of A A i T i are efficient for A . i We also generate a random positive vector for each A , i with entries from a uniform distribution in (0 , 5) , and test it for efficiency, as a baseline. The results are presented in Figure 1. We can observe that, for n close to 12 and beyond, almost always the right Perron vector and the left singular vector are efficient for A . i Not surprisingly, the random vector is efficient much less often.

We then generate 10000 random matrices A i ∈ PC n , for each n = 4 5 7 9 12 15 20 , , , , , , , following the same procedure as before and obtain for each matrix the Perron vector v P and the singular vector v S . In Table 1 we

Figure 1: Number of times the Perron vector, the singular vector and a random vector are efficient, for 10000 random reciprocal matrices of size n, for each n ≤ 25 .

![Image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/2408.00454v2-figure-0399356f-a5c8-46d6-8d99-a45e70699002.jpg)

compare the efficiency of these vectors for each matrix. We can observe that, when just one of the vectors v P or v S is efficient, v S is the one that is efficient more often.

## 6 Conclusions

Motivated by the fact that the normalized outer product of the left and right singular vectors (associated with the spectral norm) of a matrix A give the best rank 1 approximation to A (in the Frobenius norm), we developed the-

Table 1: Comparison of the efficiency of the singular vector v S and of the Perron vector v P for 10000 random reciprocal matrices of size n . The number of matrices in each case is given.

| n                                       |    4 |    5 |    7 |    9 |   12 |   15 |   20 |
|-----------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| v P is efficient and v S is inefficient |  123 |  137 |  106 |   80 |   42 |   22 |    6 |
| v P is inefficient and v S is efficient |  908 |  901 |  592 |  341 |  115 |   41 |   10 |
| v P and v S are efficient               | 8880 | 8863 | 9251 | 9548 | 9841 | 9935 | 9983 |
| v P and v S are inefficient             |   89 |   99 |   51 |   31 |    2 |    2 |    1 |

ory for the Perron vector of AA T for A ∈ PC n and its efficient vectors. This is compared to the right Perron vector for A. These vectors are efficient for a reciprocal matrix A ∈ PC n that contains a consistent ( n -1)-by-( n -1) principal submatrix, due to the shown fact that any vector in the cone generated by the columns of A is efficient for A. Then, simulations, generating random matrices A ∈ PC n , test how often each vector is efficient, as a function of n. Typically, the Perron vector of AA T performs better than the traditional right Perron vector of A, though both perform well for large n. But as the singular vector is nearly as easy to calculate, it should be preferred.

We declare there are no conflicts of interests.

## References

- [1] K. Abele-Nagy, S. Boz´ki, ´ o Efficiency analysis of simple perturbed pairwise comparison matrices , Fundamenta Informaticae 144 (2016), 279289.
- [2] K. Abele-Nagy, S. Boz´ki, O. Reb´k, ´ o a Efficiency analysis of double perturbed pairwise comparison matrices , Journal of the Operational Research Society 69 (2018), 707-713.
- [3] M. Anholcer, J. F¨l¨p, u o Deriving priorites from inconsistent PCM using the network algorithms , Annals of Operations Research 274 (2019), 5774.
- [4] G. Bajwa, E. U. Choo, W. C. Wedley, Effectiveness analysis of deriving priority vectors from reciprocal pairwise comparison matrices , AsiaPacific Journal of Operational Research, 25(3) (2008), 279-299.

| [5]   | R. Blanquero, E. Carrizosa, E. Conde, Inferring efficient weights from pairwise comparison matrices , Mathematical Methods of Operations Re- search 64 (2006), 271-284.         |
|-------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| [6]   | S. Boz´ki, o Inefficient weights from pairwise comparison matrices with arbitrarily small inconsistency , Optimization 63 (2014), 1893-1901.                                    |
| [7]   | S. Boz´ki, o J. F¨l¨p, u o Efficient weight vectors from pairwise comparison matrices , European Journal of Operational Research 264 (2018), 419- 427.                          |
| [8]   | H. Cruz, R. Fernandes, S. Furtado, Efficient vectors for simple perturbed consistent matrices , International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 139 (2021), 54-68.               |
| [9]   | E. Choo, W. Wedley, A common framework for deriving preference val- ues from pairwise comparison matrices , Computers and Operations Re- search, 31 (6) (2004), 893-908.        |
| [10]  | T. K. Dijkstra, On the extraction of weights from pairwise compari- son matrices , Central European Journal of Operations Research, 21 (1) (2013), 103-123.                     |
| [11]  | R. Fernandes, S. Furtado, Efficiency of the principal eigenvector of some triple perturbed consistent matrices, European Journal of Operational Research 298 (2022), 1007-1015. |
| [12]  | J. Fichtner, On deriving priority vectors from matrices of pairwise com- parisons , Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 20 (6) (1986), 341-345.                                    |
| [13]  | S. Furtado, Efficient vectors for double perturbed consistent matrices , Optimization 72 (2023), 2679-2701.                                                                     |
| [14]  | S. Furtado, C. R. Johnson, Efficient vectors in priority setting method- ology, Annals of Operations Research, 332 (2024), 743-764.                                             |
| [15]  | S. Furtado, C. R. Johnson, Efficiency of any weighted geometric mean of the columns of a reciprocal matrix, Linear Algebra and its Applications 680 (2024), 83-92.              |
| [16]  | S. Furtado, C. R. Johnson, Analysis of the efficiency of the Perron vector of a reciprocal matrix, submitted.                                                                   |

- [17] B. Golany, M. Kress, A multicriteria evaluation of methods for obtaining weights from ratio-scale matrices , European Journal of Operational Research, 69 (2) (1993), 210-220.
- [18] R. A. Horn, C. R. Johnson, Matrix analysis , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.
- [19] R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Topics in Matrix Analysis , Cambridge University Press, New York, 1991.
- [20] Alessio Ishizaka, Ashraf Labib, Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy proces s, Expert Systems with Applications 38 (11) (2011), 14336-14345.
- [21] C. R. Johnson, W. B. Beine, T. J. Wang, Right-left asymmetry in an eigenvector ranking procedure , Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 19 (1) (1979), 61-64.
- [22] K. Kuglyph[suppress]akowski, l J. Mazurek. M. Strada, On the similarity between ranking vectors in the pairwise comparison method , Journal of the Operational Research Society 73:9 (2022), 2080-2089.
- [23] T. L. Saaty, A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures , Journal of Mathematical Psychology 32 (1977), 234-281.
- [24] T. L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process , McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
- [25] M. Zeleny, Multiple criteria decision making , (1982) McGraw-Hill.
S. Furtado C. R. Johnson
Analysis of natural cardinal ranking vectors for pairwise comparisons and the universal efficiency of the Perron geometric mean
In models using pair-wise (ratio) comparisons among alternatives, a cardinal
ranking vector should be deduced from a reciprocal matrix. The right Perron
eigenvector (RP) was traditionally used, though several other options have
emerged. We consider some alternatives, mostly new, namely the entry-wise
reciprocal of the left Perron vector (LP), the left singular vector (LS), the
entry-wise reciprocal of the right singular vector (RS), the arithmetic and
geometric means of RP and LP (AP and GP), and of LS and RS (AS and GS). (The
ranking vector AS was proposed by Gass and Rapcs\'ak (2004)). All 8 of these
vectors produce the natural vector in the consistent case. We compare them
empirically, in terms of efficiency, for random matrices, as a function of the
number of alternatives. It turns out that the vector GP is universily
efficient, and this fact is proven. The vector GS performs better that the
remaining 6 vectors. We show that, for reciprocal matrices obtained from
consistent matrices by modifying one column and the corresponding row, all 8
vectors are efficient. Moreover, the cone generated by the columns is
efficient.