Endnotes

1.	T. L. Saaty, "Rank Generation, Preservation, and Reversal in the Analytic Hierarchy Decision Process," Decision Sciences, Vol. 18, 1987, pp. 157177.
2.	http://eprints.cs.vt.edu:8000/archive/00000399/.
3.	B. W. Boehm, "Quantitative Evaluation of Software Quality," Proceedings of ICSE 2 (1976): 592605.
4.	B. Littlewood and L. Strigini, "Software Reliability and Dependability: A Roadmap," Proceedings of ICSE 2000, the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering, p. 2.
5.	http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=116455. Gartner's Refined Hierarchical Analysis method is considered a proven best practice for making technology acquisition choices that fit an enterprise's long-term needs, as well as its immediate requirements.
6.	Expert Choice tutorial material at http://www.expertchoice.com.
7.	Op cit Saaty, p. 157.
8.	R. Fisher and W. Ury, Getting to YES (Penguin Books, 1983).
9.	Op cit Saaty, p. 159.
10.	D. R. Anderson, D. J. Sweeny, T. A. Williams, Quantitative Methods for Business, 6th Ed. (St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1995), p. 814.
11.	T. L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980), pp. 165197.
12.	T. L. Saaty, "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, Vol. 24, No. 6, 1994, pp. 1943. This article is also available on http://sigma.poligran.edu.co/politecnico/apoyo/Decisiones/curso/Interfaces.pdf.
13.	http://www.expertchoice.com/customerservice/faqs.htm#Possible_differences_in_priorities_of_the_alternatives_in_the_model_view_and_the_data_grid.
14.	Op cit Anderson, et. al, p. 816.
15.	Op cit Saaty 1, p. 160.
16.	Op cit Anderson, et al., p. 817.
17.	M. Brassard, The Memory Jogger Plus+ (Methuen, MA: Goal/QPC, 1989), pp. 103116.
18.	Ibid, p. 111.
19.	T. L. Saaty, Decision Making for Leaders (Pittsburg: RWS Publications, 1990).
20.	http://www.expertchoice.com.
21.	E. Forman and M. A. Selly, Decision by Objectives (Singapore: World Scientific Publications, 2001), pp. 43126.