MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992359248 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2014.2387096

Grey-Based Preference in a Graph Model for Conflict Resolution With Multiple Decision Makers

2015· article· en· W1992359248 on OpenAlexafffund
Hanbin Kuang, MA Bashar, Keith W. Hipel, D. Marc Kilgour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaRoyal Society of Canada
KeywordsPreferenceConflict resolutionGraphComputer scienceOperations researchMathematicsManagement scienceArtificial intelligenceEconomicsStatisticsPolitical scienceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To capture uncertainty in preferences, definitions based on grey numbers are incorporated into the graph model for conflict resolution (GMCR), a realistic and flexible methodology to model and analyze strategic conflicts. A general grey number is a real number that may be a member of a discrete set of real numbers, or may fall within one or several intervals. It can represent uncertain preference of decision makers in a meaningful way. Here, a grey-based preference structure is developed and integrated with GMCR. Utilizing a number of grey-based ideas, solution concepts describing human behavior under conflict in the face of uncertain preference are defined for a conflict model. This grey-based GMCR is then applied to a generic sustainable development conflict with uncertain preferences in order to demonstrate how it can be conveniently utilized in practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.256
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.101 · 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

Citations139
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207