MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577996632 · doi:10.1155/2017/7131094

ELECTRE I Based Relevance Decision-Makers Feedback to the Location Selection of Distribution Centers

2017· article· en· W2577996632 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mourad Abed, Mohamed Nazih Omri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsELECTRESelection (genetic algorithm)Relevance (law)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)Operations researchMultiple-criteria decision analysisWeightingDecision modelData miningMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The location selection of distribution centers is one of the important strategies to optimize the logistics system. To solve this problem, under certain environment, this paper presents a new multicriteria decision-making method based on ELECTRE I. The proposed method helps decision-makers to select the best location from a given set of locations for implementing. After having identified decision-makers, the criteria, and the set of locations, the factors influencing the selection are analyzed in order to identify the best location. A sensitivity analysis is then performed to determine the influence of criteria weights on the selection decision. The strength of the proposed method is to incorporate decision-makers’ preferences into the decision-making process. In addition, the proposed method considers both quantitative and qualitative criteria. Finally, the selected solution is validated by both tests of concordance and discordance simultaneously. A case study is provided to illustrate the proposed method.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.378
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207