Enhanced decision-making in uncertain environments: A Fermatean fuzzy approach for heterogeneous group dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today's dynamic and uncertain environments, effective decision-making processes are essential for navigating complex challenges. This paper proposes an innovative approach utilizing Fermatean fuzzy sets to enhance decision-making within heterogeneous group dynamics. Through a systematic mathematical framework, our method integrates expert preferences to find out the comparative weight of decision attribue, leveraging both Fermatean fuzzy sets and entropy calculations. Furthermore, we introduce a novel technique to assess the significance of individual experts' opinions, accounting for specific contextual factors. By synthesizing performance ratings, criteria weights, and expert inputs, our approach offers a comprehensive decision-making model. We introduce the concept of the proximity coefficient to address existing methodological limitations, enhancing the accuracy of decision outcomes. To validate our methodology, we apply it to a practical scenario involving warehouse location selection. Additionally, analysis of sensitivity is conducted to evaluate the robustness of our method across diverse scenarios, demonstrating its efficacy in uncertain environments. This research contributes to advancing decision-making practices in complex and uncertain contexts, offering a valuable tool for addressing real-world challenges.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".