MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2438776784 · doi:10.5267/j.dsl.2016.3.002

A comparative study for the agricultural tractor selection problem

2016· article· en· W2438776784 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayşegül Tuş Işık, Esra Aytaç Adalı

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Science Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTractorSelection (genetic algorithm)AgricultureAgricultural engineeringEngineeringOperations researchBusinessComputer scienceGeographyArtificial intelligenceAutomotive engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural tractor selection is vital for farms, farmers or other agricultural companies in terms of success and competitiveness in the global market.This selection may be assumed as a MCDM (Multi Criteria Decision Making) problem involving qualitative and quantitative factors that must be simultaneously integrated into the selection process.At the same time there are many agricultural tractor alternatives in the market when purchasing an agricultural tractor.This paper deals with the agricultural tractor selection problem using TOPSIS method.This problem is also solved with two other MCDM methods; COPRAS (COmplex PRoportional ASsessment) and EVAMIX (EVAluation of MIXed Data) to rank the tractors alternatives.Lastly Borda and Copeland methods are used to aggregate all three ranking results.

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)0.019
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Science LettersSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207