Urban Vulnerability Assessment Using AHP

Table 8

Preference intensity evaluation by binary comparison relatively between criterions in AHP [16].

Preference intensity	Comparison status of “i” relative to “j”	Description
(1)	Equally preferred	Item “i” has equal priority with “j” or there is no preference
(3)	Moderately preferred	Item “i” is slightly more important than “j”
(5)	Strongly preferred	Item “i” is important than “j”
(7)	Very strongly preferred	Item “i” is more important than “j”
(9)	Extremely preferred	Item “i” is absolutely more important than “j” and is not comparable to “j”
(10)	Especial importance	Item “i” is absolutely more important than “j” and has very special importance
(2), (4), (6), and (8)	Median preference	Show the median values over preferred values. For example, 8 expresses greater importance over 7 and less than 9 for “i” in comparison to “j”