## 2 Literature Review
### Analytical Hierarchy Process  
The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was proposed by [PERSON], an American operations researcher, in the early 1970s, with the aim of constructing a multi-criteria decision-making model through the combination of qualitative analysis and quantitative calculations [33]. Its core value lies in deconstructing the complex system into goal, criterion, and indicator layers and analyzing the weights through judgment matrices to finally realize the optimal solution ranking [34]. For example, [PERSON] applied AHP to military cabin color factor extraction and established the optimal color sequence and design factor space [35]; [PERSON] used AHP for the prioritization of home plumbing service design, highlighting the importance of the system design elements [36]; [PERSON] evaluated the product attributes and market trends of children's smart mugs through AHP, and put forward a quantitative data-based design concept [37]; [PERSON] proposed an evaluation system for restaurant seating design based on AHP and FAHP, emphasizing meeting user needs and enhancing product competitiveness [38].  
The application of AHP in interface design is promising, especially in interface prioritization by analyzing the design elements hierarchically and specifying the weights, thus helping designers to rationally order multiple complex decision problems. However, a major limitation of AHP is the lack of consideration of emotional depth. In emotional design, users' emotional needs are often subjective and difficult to quantify, and AHP focuses on structured quantitative data that may not adequately capture the complexity of emotional needs. In addition, AHP lacks adaptability to dynamic demand changes, especially in rapidly changing product development, and it cannot flexibly respond to changes in user needs or environmental conditions related to design elements.  
To compensate for this shortcoming, this study combines AHP with KE and utilizes KE's quantitative measurement of emotional needs to provide emotional-needs-related support for AHP. In the Dual-Path Optimization Model, AHP helps designers to clarify the priority of requirements and ensure the scientific and systematic design objectives by classifying user requirements, functional requirements, and emotional requirements in a hierarchical way. Through this hierarchical structure, designers can clearly identify the needs that need to be prioritized and avoid neglecting critical emotional needs. Second, the combination of KE and TRIZ further enhances the precision and innovation of design. In KE's emotional needs analysis, AHP helps to provide prioritization for emotional needs, so that the design not only meets functional needs, but also fits with users' emotional needs. In the conflict resolution of TRIZ, AHP can effectively differentiate the priorities of technical and emotional needs, so as to provide a clear direction for TRIZ and ensure that the user's emotional needs are satisfied while technical conflicts are resolved.  
Therefore, AHP not only provides a systematic analysis framework for complex decision-making problems in interface design but also works synergistically with other methods to ensure that the design solution comprehensively and efficiently realizes the transformation of needs and the resolution of technical conflicts.