Exploring Multicriteria Decision Strategies in GIS with Linguistic Quantifiers – A Case Study of Residential Quality Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commonly used GIS combination operators such as Boolean conjunction/disjunction and weighted linear combination can be generalized to the ordered weighted averaging (OWA) family of operators. This multicriteria evaluation method allows decision-makers to define a decision strategy on a continuum between pessimistic and optimistic strategies. Recently, OWA has been introduced to GIS-based decision support systems. We propose to extend a previous implementation of OWA with linguistic quantifiers to simplify the definition of decision strategies and to facilitate an exploratory analysis of multiple criteria. The linguistic quantifier-guided OWA procedure is illustrated using a dataset for evaluating residential quality of neighborhoods in London, Ontario. <div><br></div><div>This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Journal of Geographical Systems. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10109-005-0159-2 <br></div>
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".