MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992899512 · doi:10.1142/s0219622006001939

ELICITING RATIO PREFERENCES FOR THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS WITH VISUAL INTERFACES: A NEW MODE OF PREFERENCE MEASUREMENT

2006· article· en· W1992899512 on OpenAlexafffund
Sajjad Zahir

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPairwise comparisonAnalytic hierarchy processPreferenceComputer scienceClass (philosophy)HierarchyMode (computer interface)Process (computing)VisualizationArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionMachine learningStatisticsOperations researchMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although verbal and numerical scales are commonly used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process for pairwise comparisons, new experiments with computer-based visual tools confirm that ratio preferences can be effectively and efficiently elicited using adjustable visual tools and simultaneous comparisons, as well. Such an improved approach shows promise in the design of a new class of multi-criteria decision support system both for individual and group decisions.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Technology & Decision MakingSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207