I used the table attached below in my survey for AHP methodology. However, when I run the method in excel, I had challenge due to the ranges of numbers. I mean in fundamental scale, 1 is equal, but in the scale I used, 5 is equal. So to solve the problem I converted the scale into the fundamental one suggested by Saaty, based on the verbal explanation while running the methodology. I am wondering if I did it right or not. I cannot find the basis for that.And the second challenge I faced is related to inconsistency. Since I conducted survey confidentially I couldn't guide the respondents. And most of them meet the transitivity, but not inconsistency. It was because they gave mostly "absolute significance" value while comparing the criteria. For example, A is absolutely significant compared to B, B is absolutely significant compared to C and A is absolutely significant compared to C. Therefore their replies don't pass inconsistency test. How can I solve the problem? And is their any software (free ones are preferable) which might adjust the inconsistency?

O Measure of Importance Interpretation Equal Significance Moderate Significance Strong Significance Very Strong Significance Absolute Significance O