MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999696793 · doi:10.1504/ijetm.2006.008251

Integrating multicriteria analysis and geographic information systems: the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) approach

2005· article· en· W1999696793 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jacek Malczewski

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Technology and Management · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralityGeographic information systemWatershedComputer scienceOrder (exchange)Data miningMathematical optimizationOperations researchMathematicsMachine learningGeographyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ordered weighted averaging (OWA) is a family of multicriteria combination (aggregation) procedures. The generality of OWA is related to its capability to implement different combination operators by selecting appropriate order weights. By specifying suitable order weights it is possible to change the form of aggregation from the minimum-type combination through all intermediate types including the conventional weighted linear combination, to the maximum-type combination. The paper focuses on the OWA method and an approach for integrating geographic information system (GIS) and OWA. It also discusses an application of the GIS-OWA system to a real-world environmental management problem that involves developing watershed management strategies in the Cedar Creek watershed in Ontario, Canada.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations103
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Technology and ManagementSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207