MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041899150 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2020.3007423

Three-Way Multiattribute Decision-Making Based on Outranking Relations

2020· article· en· W3041899150 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDecision matrixComputer scienceELECTRETable (database)Construct (python library)RationalitySet (abstract data type)Relation (database)Decision analysisContrast (vision)Multiple-criteria decision analysisMathematical optimizationOperations researchData miningMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In contrast to two-way decisions (2WD), three-way decisions (3WD) can effectively reduce decision risks by utilizing a new delayed decision option. This article incorporates 3WD into multiattribute decision-making (MADM) based on an outranking relation. We construct the outranked set for each alternative and introduce a hybrid information table that combines an MADM matrix with a loss function table. We propose three strategies to design a new 3WD model for MADM. The rationality and effectiveness of the proposed 3WD method are demonstrated by solving a problem of enterprise project investment target selections. Finally, we provide the comparative analysis and two experimental evaluations. The results show that the proposed 3WD method is effective and practically useful.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.218 · 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