MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967250667 · doi:10.1002/atr.5670430204

Multiple criteria and fuzzy based evaluation of logistics performance for intermodal transportation

2009· article· en· W1967250667 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shinya Hanaoka, Pichet Kunadhamraks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicAnalytic hierarchy processMultiple-criteria decision analysisSet (abstract data type)Operations researchProcess (computing)Computer scienceFuzzy setFuzzy transportationTransport engineeringFuzzy numberEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents a framework to evaluate the logistics performance of intermodal freight transportation. Fuzzy set techniques are applied to assess the logistics performance within the decision process of freight operators. Using a fuzzy‐based approach, fuzzy‐AHP is applied to assess the criteria by different judgment procedures. Consequently, fuzzy‐MCDM is used to assess operators' perception of the logistics performance via proper assignment of numerical scores. The subjective judgments for hierarchical criteria are transformed into fuzzy degrees of score. The methodology provides an alternative approach to facilitate the importance of a set of performance criteria. It can also entail use of improved corresponding parameters to develop a better freight transport system.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207