标准的权重和相互作用的度量标准

Standards Pub Date : 2021-11-05 DOI:10.3390/standards1020010
A. P. Sant’Anna
{"title":"标准的权重和相互作用的度量标准","authors":"A. P. Sant’Anna","doi":"10.3390/standards1020010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the need for standards for the assignment of importance to criteria and the measurement of interaction between them in multiple criteria analyses of complex systems. A strategy for criteria evaluation is considered that is suitable to account for the interaction among a wide variety of imprecisely assessed criteria applied simultaneously. It is based on the results of collecting sample information on preferences according to the specified criteria instead of merely an abstract comparison of the criteria. The comparison of alternatives is based on objectives that determine the formation of preferences. It is facilitated by a rating in terms of preference probabilities. Probabilistic standards grant homogeneity of measurements by different criteria, which is useful for the combination of the criteria. These standards apply to a sampling evaluation conducted via pairwise trichotomic comparison of the alternatives according to each criterion, followed by the combination of these multiple evaluations into a single global score by means of the Choquet Integral with respect to a capacity determined by applying preference concentration to the sets of probabilistic assessments. Examples of practical application are discussed.","PeriodicalId":21933,"journal":{"name":"Standards","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Standards for the Weighting of Criteria and the Measurement of Interaction\",\"authors\":\"A. P. Sant’Anna\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/standards1020010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses the need for standards for the assignment of importance to criteria and the measurement of interaction between them in multiple criteria analyses of complex systems. A strategy for criteria evaluation is considered that is suitable to account for the interaction among a wide variety of imprecisely assessed criteria applied simultaneously. It is based on the results of collecting sample information on preferences according to the specified criteria instead of merely an abstract comparison of the criteria. The comparison of alternatives is based on objectives that determine the formation of preferences. It is facilitated by a rating in terms of preference probabilities. Probabilistic standards grant homogeneity of measurements by different criteria, which is useful for the combination of the criteria. These standards apply to a sampling evaluation conducted via pairwise trichotomic comparison of the alternatives according to each criterion, followed by the combination of these multiple evaluations into a single global score by means of the Choquet Integral with respect to a capacity determined by applying preference concentration to the sets of probabilistic assessments. Examples of practical application are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21933,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Standards\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Standards\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/standards1020010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Standards","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/standards1020010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文讨论了在复杂系统的多准则分析中,对准则的重要性分配和它们之间相互作用的测量的标准的必要性。考虑了一种适合于解释同时应用的各种不精确评估标准之间的相互作用的标准评估策略。它是根据特定的标准收集关于偏好的样本信息的结果,而不仅仅是对标准的抽象比较。选择的比较是基于决定偏好形成的目标。这是由偏好概率的评级促成的。概率标准使不同标准的测量具有同质性,这对标准的组合很有用。这些标准适用于通过根据每个标准对备选方案进行两两三组比较进行的抽样评估,然后通过将偏好浓度应用于概率评估集确定的能力,通过Choquet积分将这些多重评估组合成单个全局评分。讨论了实际应用的实例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Standards for the Weighting of Criteria and the Measurement of Interaction
This article discusses the need for standards for the assignment of importance to criteria and the measurement of interaction between them in multiple criteria analyses of complex systems. A strategy for criteria evaluation is considered that is suitable to account for the interaction among a wide variety of imprecisely assessed criteria applied simultaneously. It is based on the results of collecting sample information on preferences according to the specified criteria instead of merely an abstract comparison of the criteria. The comparison of alternatives is based on objectives that determine the formation of preferences. It is facilitated by a rating in terms of preference probabilities. Probabilistic standards grant homogeneity of measurements by different criteria, which is useful for the combination of the criteria. These standards apply to a sampling evaluation conducted via pairwise trichotomic comparison of the alternatives according to each criterion, followed by the combination of these multiple evaluations into a single global score by means of the Choquet Integral with respect to a capacity determined by applying preference concentration to the sets of probabilistic assessments. Examples of practical application are discussed.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信