MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963815488 · doi:10.1111/itor.12073

Multicriteria decision making under uncertainty: a visual approach

2014· article· en· W1963815488 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStochastic gameComputer scienceDownside riskVariety (cybernetics)VisualizationOptimal decisionDecision analysisDecision problemOperations researchManagement scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Artificial intelligenceDecision treeEconomicsMathematicsMathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Decision problems at the strategic level tend to have multiple criteria and outcomes that are uncertain. Many of the current decision‐making tools are too simplistic to incorporate the important features. This paper considers a multicriteria decision‐making scenario in which the outcomes of the decisions, evaluated on different criteria, are uncertain. The main contribution of this paper is the presentation of a tool that enables decision makers to visualize the expected payoff and likelihood that the payoff of a decision does not fall short of a preset target value. Furthermore, it presents decision makers with a tool that shows the tradeoff between expected payoff and downside risk. A variety of solution techniques are suggested that build upon this visualization.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it