Ranking industries using a hybrid of DEA-TOPSIS
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
Ranking industry normally helps find hot sectors and attract potential investors to invest in appropriate plans. Ranking various industries is also a multiple criteria decision making problem. In this paper, we present an empirical investigation to rank different industries using the art of data envelopment analysis (DEA). The inputs of our proposed DEA model include capital, employment and importance coefficient and outputs are exports, ecological effects and added value. In addition, exports, value added and environmental investment are used as outputs of DEA method. Since the results of DEA may consider more than one efficient unit, so we implement Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) technique to rank efficient units. In our case study, there were 15 different sectors from various industries and the implementation of DEA technique recommends 8 efficient units. The implementation of TOPSIS among these efficient units has suggested that Chemical industry could be considered as the most attracting industry for investment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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