MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801250026 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2018.3.002

Application of TODIM (TOmada de Decisao Interativa Multicriterio) method for under-construction housing project selection in Kolkata

2018· article· en· W2801250026 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicConstruction Project Management and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArchitectural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper focuses on the application of TODIM (TOmada de Decisao Interativa Multicriterio), which means in Portuguese 'interactive and multi-criteria decision making') method in identifying the most attractive and affordable under-construction housing project in the city of Kolkata in India. In this decision making problem, 14 under-construction housing projects spanning in and around Kolkata are evaluated with respect to ten important criteria. The deployment of TODIM method can well be validated with respect to its ability to deal with both qualitative and quantitative criteria in the presence of risk factors. This method is also acknowledged to be a robust tool being almost unaffected by the varying values of the attenuation factor of losses. Using TODIM method, an under-construction housing project at Rajarhat in the eastern fringes of Kolkata city is selected as the optimal choice while meeting the requirements of investors, inhabitants and other stakeholders.

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)0.005
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.363 · 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