Pythagorean fuzzy combinative distance-based assessment with pure linguistic information and its application to financial strategies of multi-national companies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article addresses the issue of selecting Financial Strategies in Multi-National companies (F.S.M.). The F.S.M. typically has to consider multiple factors involving multiple stakeholders and, hence, can be handled by applying an appropriate Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making (M.C.G.D.M.) approach. To address this issue, we develop an M.C.G.D.M. framework to tackle the F.S.M. problem. To handle inherent uncertainty in business decisions as reflected by linguistic reasoning, we embark on constructing a Linguistic Pythagorean Fuzzy (L.P.F.) M.C.G.D.M. framework that is capable of tackling both uncertain decision information and linguistic variables. The proposed approach extends the combinative distance-based assessment (C.O.D.A.S.) method into the L.P.F. environment, and processes decision input expressed as Pythagorean fuzzy sets (P.F.S.) and pure linguistic variables (rather than converting linguistic information into fuzzy numbers). The developed L.P.F.-C.O.D.A.S. technique aggregates the L.P.F. information and is applied to the F.S.M. problem with uncertain linguistic information. A comparative analysis is carried out to compare the results obtained from the proposed L.P.F.-C.O.D.A.S. approach with those from other extensions of C.O.D.A.S. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to check the impact of changes in a distance threshold parameter on the 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".