MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2303465671 · doi:10.13033/isahp.y2001.011

A Unit Interpretation of Multi-Criteria Ratios

2001· article· en· W2303465671 on OpenAlexafffund
William C. Wedley, Eng Ung Choo

Bibliographic record

VenueISAHP proceedings · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)Unit (ring theory)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceInterpretation (philosophy)Level of measurementStatisticsMathematicsData miningPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When AHP ratios are normalized to sum to unity, the unit of measure becomes obscure.This paper investigates this obscurity and whether ratio measurement is possible when there is no prior knowledge of the measurement unit.First, we look at ratio scales of tangible attributes of objects with well-known measures.Then ratio scales of unknown intangible attributes of objects are analyzed.We discover that natural zero and the unit of measure are not necessarily used explicitly in deriving ratio scale measures.Nevertheless, the derived scale does have a derived unit of measurement.We conclude that although composite multi-criteria answers are possible in ratio form, it is important to know that a unit of measure exists if ambiguities are to be avoided.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISAHP proceedingsSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207