在欧洲贻贝水产养殖和加工业中,验证分析分层法工具中的除杂添加物,以提高侧流利用和过滤系统选择的效果

Søren Espersen Schrøder, David San Martin, Giuseppe Foti, Monica Gutierrez, Bruno Iñarra Chastagnol, J. R. Nielsen, Erling Larsen
{"title":"在欧洲贻贝水产养殖和加工业中,验证分析分层法工具中的除杂添加物,以提高侧流利用和过滤系统选择的效果","authors":"Søren Espersen Schrøder, David San Martin, Giuseppe Foti, Monica Gutierrez, Bruno Iñarra Chastagnol, J. R. Nielsen, Erling Larsen","doi":"10.3389/frfst.2023.1258713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: New EU regulations for increased sustainability and better utilization of side-streams are pushing the European mussel farming and processing industry to adapt to new regulations regarding their wastewater production, which leads to incentives for optimizing methods for better utilization of this side-stream resource. In this study, one such European company is faced with a choice of a filtration system out of three possible options, to invest in and achieve the option with the best balance between economic gain and environmentally sound production.Method: For this, a specialized Analytical Hieratical Processes (AHP) tool was utilized together with a supplementary Debias Your Decisions (DYD) tool to visualize the local best choice for the company.Results: Based on the generated user weights from the company it was apparent that the user weights were biased towards certain criteria in the AHP tool, which meant that half of the tool’s criteria had greatly diminished influence on the tool’s scores. This brought into question the objectivity of the Performance index (Pi) score results from the AHP tool when the user weights were applied, since these Pi scores deviated significantly from the expert Pi scores. The supplement tool DYD was found to be able to identify the dominant decision biases influencing the user weights in the current case, which enabled the implementation of relevant debiasing techniques to correct for the overweighted user weights from the company. With these corrections and the case company’s input data, the optimum alternative suggested for the case company is membrane filtration based on the final Pi scores for all weight sets.Discussion: This process and final debiased results further validated the AHP tools results as objectively grounded due to their convergence with the experts’ scoring results. This study also served as further validation for the new supplement DYD tool as the current sensitivity analysis showed the tool’s robustness to be high.","PeriodicalId":93753,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in food science and technology","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of a debiasing addition to Analytical Hieratical Process tools to increase the effects of side-stream utilization and the choice of the filtration system in the European mussel aquaculture and processing industry\",\"authors\":\"Søren Espersen Schrøder, David San Martin, Giuseppe Foti, Monica Gutierrez, Bruno Iñarra Chastagnol, J. R. Nielsen, Erling Larsen\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frfst.2023.1258713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: New EU regulations for increased sustainability and better utilization of side-streams are pushing the European mussel farming and processing industry to adapt to new regulations regarding their wastewater production, which leads to incentives for optimizing methods for better utilization of this side-stream resource. In this study, one such European company is faced with a choice of a filtration system out of three possible options, to invest in and achieve the option with the best balance between economic gain and environmentally sound production.Method: For this, a specialized Analytical Hieratical Processes (AHP) tool was utilized together with a supplementary Debias Your Decisions (DYD) tool to visualize the local best choice for the company.Results: Based on the generated user weights from the company it was apparent that the user weights were biased towards certain criteria in the AHP tool, which meant that half of the tool’s criteria had greatly diminished influence on the tool’s scores. This brought into question the objectivity of the Performance index (Pi) score results from the AHP tool when the user weights were applied, since these Pi scores deviated significantly from the expert Pi scores. The supplement tool DYD was found to be able to identify the dominant decision biases influencing the user weights in the current case, which enabled the implementation of relevant debiasing techniques to correct for the overweighted user weights from the company. With these corrections and the case company’s input data, the optimum alternative suggested for the case company is membrane filtration based on the final Pi scores for all weight sets.Discussion: This process and final debiased results further validated the AHP tools results as objectively grounded due to their convergence with the experts’ scoring results. This study also served as further validation for the new supplement DYD tool as the current sensitivity analysis showed the tool’s robustness to be high.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93753,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in food science and technology\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in food science and technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frfst.2023.1258713\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in food science and technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frfst.2023.1258713","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:欧盟关于提高可持续性和更好地利用侧流的新规定促使欧洲贻贝养殖和加工业适应有关其废水生产的新规定,从而激励人们优化方法,更好地利用侧流资源。在本研究中,一家这样的欧洲公司面临着从三种可能的方案中选择一种过滤系统,投资并实现经济收益和无害环境生产之间最佳平衡的方案:方法:为此,我们使用了一个专门的层次分析法(AHP)工具和一个辅助的 "你的决策"(DYD)工具,以直观地显示该公司的最佳选择:结果:根据从公司生成的用户权重,可以明显看出用户权重偏向于 AHP 工具中的某些标准,这意味着工具中的一半标准对工具评分的影响大大降低。这就对使用用户权重的 AHP 工具得出的绩效指数(Pi)结果的客观性提出了质疑,因为这些 Pi 分数与专家的 Pi 分数有很大偏差。在本案例中,我们发现补充工具 DYD 能够识别影响用户权重的主要决策偏差,从而能够实施相关的去重技术来纠正该公司过高的用户权重。通过这些修正和案例公司的输入数据,根据所有权重集的最终 Pi 分数,为案例公司建议的最佳替代方案是膜过滤:讨论:这一过程和最终的去偏结果进一步验证了 AHP 工具的结果是客观的,因为它们与专家的评分结果趋同。这项研究还进一步验证了新的补充 DYD 工具,因为当前的敏感性分析表明该工具具有很高的稳健性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validation of a debiasing addition to Analytical Hieratical Process tools to increase the effects of side-stream utilization and the choice of the filtration system in the European mussel aquaculture and processing industry
Introduction: New EU regulations for increased sustainability and better utilization of side-streams are pushing the European mussel farming and processing industry to adapt to new regulations regarding their wastewater production, which leads to incentives for optimizing methods for better utilization of this side-stream resource. In this study, one such European company is faced with a choice of a filtration system out of three possible options, to invest in and achieve the option with the best balance between economic gain and environmentally sound production.Method: For this, a specialized Analytical Hieratical Processes (AHP) tool was utilized together with a supplementary Debias Your Decisions (DYD) tool to visualize the local best choice for the company.Results: Based on the generated user weights from the company it was apparent that the user weights were biased towards certain criteria in the AHP tool, which meant that half of the tool’s criteria had greatly diminished influence on the tool’s scores. This brought into question the objectivity of the Performance index (Pi) score results from the AHP tool when the user weights were applied, since these Pi scores deviated significantly from the expert Pi scores. The supplement tool DYD was found to be able to identify the dominant decision biases influencing the user weights in the current case, which enabled the implementation of relevant debiasing techniques to correct for the overweighted user weights from the company. With these corrections and the case company’s input data, the optimum alternative suggested for the case company is membrane filtration based on the final Pi scores for all weight sets.Discussion: This process and final debiased results further validated the AHP tools results as objectively grounded due to their convergence with the experts’ scoring results. This study also served as further validation for the new supplement DYD tool as the current sensitivity analysis showed the tool’s robustness to be high.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信