MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015097383 · doi:10.3846/13923730.2012.699914

DATA PREPROCESSING FOR ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK APPLICATIONS IN PRIORITIZING RAILROAD PROJECTS – A PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE IN TAIWAN

2012· article· en· W2015097383 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Civil Engineering and Management · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalytic hierarchy processRanking (information retrieval)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkConsistency (knowledge bases)PreprocessorOperations researchArtificial intelligenceData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Financial constraints necessitate the tradeoff among proposed railroad projects, so that the project priorities for implementation and budget allocation need to be determined by the ranking mechanisms in the government. At present, the Taiwan central government prioritizes funding allocations primarily using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a methodology that permits the synthesizing of subjective judgments systematically and logically into objective consensus. However, due to the coopetition and heterogeneity of railway projects, the proper priorities of railroad projects could not be always evaluated by the AHP. The decision makers prefer subjective judgments to referring to the AHP evaluation results. This circumstance not only decreased the AHP advantages, but also raised the risk of the policies. A method to consider both objective measures and subjective judgments of project attributes can help reduce this problem. Accordingly, combining the AHP with the artificial neural network (ANN) methodologies would theoretically be a proper solution to bring a ranking predication model by creating the obscure relations between objective measures by the AHP and subjective judgments. However, the inconsistency between the AHP evaluation and subjective judgments resulted in the inferior soundness of the AHP/ANN ranking forecast model. To overcome this problem, this study proposes the data preprocessing method (DPM) to calculate the correlation coefficient value using the subjective and objective ranking incidence matrixes; according to the correlation coefficient value, the consistency between the AHP rankings and subjective judgments of railroad projects can be evaluated and improved, so that the forecast accuracy of the AHP/ANN ranking forecast model can also be enhanced. Based on this concept, a practical railroad project ranking experience derived from the Institute of Transportation of Taiwan is illustrated in this paper to reveal the feasibility of applying the DPM to the AHP/ANN ranking prediction model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.265 · 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