Fuzzy-Based Life-Cycle Cost Model for Decision Making under Subjectivity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decision support models are needed to facilitate long-term planning and priority setting among competing alternatives. Life-cycle cost is the most frequently used economic model that considers all cost elements and related factors throughout the service life of the alternatives being considered. These cost elements and related factors are usually associated with uncertainty and subjectivity. As such, it is important to model the uncertainty arising from the assumed data over the service life of competing alternatives. Probabilistic techniques, such as Monte Carlo simulation, are commonly used to deal with such uncertainty or vagueness. However, they have been criticized for their complexity and amount of data required. This paper presents a fuzzy-based life-cycle cost model that accounts for uncertainty in a manner that disadvantages commonly encountered in probabilistic models are alleviated. The developed model utilized fuzzy set theory and interval mathematics to model vague, imprecise, qualitative, linguistic, and/or incomplete data. The model incorporates the equivalent annual cost method along with the Day–Stout–Warren (DSW) algorithm and the vertex method to evaluate competing alternatives. An example application is presented in order to demonstrate the use of the developed model and to illustrate its essential features.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it