Legal document similarity: a multi-criteria decision-making perspective.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wagh RS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7924540 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Having to explain a decision has often been found to have a positive effect on the quality of a decision. We aimed to determine whether different accountability requirements for judges (i.e., having to justify their decision or having to explicate their decision) affect evidence use. Those requirements were compared to instructions based on the falsification principle and a control condition. Participants (N = 173) decided on the defendant's guilt in a murder case vignette and explained their decision according to the instructions. The explication and falsification (but not the justification) instructions increased the use of exonerating evidence. There was no significant difference between the groups in guilt perception. The use of exonerating evidence was a significant positive predictor of acquittal rates. The implications for the different forms of instructions in practice are positive, but suggest a difference between the evidence considered and the evidence used to account for the decision.
| S-EPMC9225718 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To simplify chemical risk assessment, the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) method has arisen as a framework to predict the impact of chemical exposure on human and environmental health. The development of this predictive tool requires knowledge of the molecular interaction between chemicals and protein targets. Here, we demonstrate that the identification and selection of a target candidate to develop adverse outcome pathways can be obtained by applying high-throughput identification of chemical targets by proteome integral solubility alteration (PISA) assay, followed by selecting the priority target candidate by an analytical hierarchy process. From 8 identified protein targets for TCDD from a soluble proteome extracted from hepatocytes, we selected the priority target for developing AOPs. Our combined methodologies provide identification of a molecular initiating event, essential knowledge to link molecular interaction to impact on health. The identification of chemical targets following a systematic analysis of chemical protein interaction by proteomics increases the high-throughput and reduces the traditional bias. The target selection eliminates conflicting criteria by applying a multiple-criteria decision-making analysis.
2023-03-11 | PXD033056 | Pride
Project description:The impact of a near-Earth object (NEO) may release large amounts of energy and cause serious damage. Several NEO hazard studies conducted over the past few years provide forecasts, impact probabilities and assessment ratings, such as the Torino and Palermo scales. These high-risk NEO assessments involve several criteria, including impact energy, mass, and absolute magnitude. The main objective of this paper is to provide the first Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach to classify hazardous NEOs. Our approach applies a combination of two methods from a widely utilized decision making theory. Specifically, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) methodology is employed to determine the criteria weights, which influence the decision making, and the Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is used to obtain a ranking of alternatives (potentially hazardous NEOs). In addition, NEO datasets provided by the NASA Near-Earth Object Program are utilized. This approach allows the classification of NEOs by descending order of their TOPSIS ratio, a single quantity that contains all of the relevant information for each object.
| S-EPMC5111055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Select Agent Program establishes a list of biological agents and toxins that potentially threaten public health and safety, the procedures governing the possession, utilization, and transfer of those agents, and training requirements for entities working with them. Every 2 years the Program reviews the select agent list, utilizing subject matter expert (SME) assessments to rank the agents. In this study, we explore the applicability of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) techniques and logic tree analysis to support the CDC Select Agent Program biennial review process, applying the approach broadly to include non-select agents to evaluate its generality. We conducted a literature search for over 70 pathogens against 15 criteria for assessing public health and bioterrorism risk and documented the findings for archiving. The most prominent data gaps were found for aerosol stability and human infectious dose by inhalation and ingestion routes. Technical review of published data and associated scoring recommendations by pathogen-specific SMEs was found to be critical for accuracy, particularly for pathogens with very few known cases, or where proxy data (e.g., from animal models or similar organisms) were used to address data gaps. Analysis of results obtained from a two-dimensional plot of weighted scores for difficulty of attack (i.e., exposure and production criteria) vs. consequences of an attack (i.e., consequence and mitigation criteria) provided greater fidelity for understanding agent placement compared to a 1-to-n ranking and was used to define a region in the upper right-hand quadrant for identifying pathogens for consideration as select agents. A sensitivity analysis varied the numerical weights attributed to various properties of the pathogens to identify potential quantitative (x and y) thresholds for classifying select agents. The results indicate while there is some clustering of agent scores to suggest thresholds, there are still pathogens that score close to any threshold, suggesting that thresholding "by eye" may not be sufficient. The sensitivity analysis indicates quantitative thresholds are plausible, and there is good agreement of the analytical results with select agent designations. A second analytical approach that applied the data using a logic tree format to rule out pathogens for consideration as select agents arrived at similar conclusions.
| S-EPMC9204104 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The structure of underground coal mines is vulnerable to many mishaps because of the challenging conditions of production and the unique features of the earth. These incidents could cause significant financial and production losses for the mines in addition to worker injury, disability, or death. In coal mines, methane explosions are a frequent threat. Establishing a safe work environment requires managing these problems with an accident control method. The current study used the fuzzy TOPSIS and fuzzy AHP techniques for this aim. The framework was used to tackle the four-alternative problem of underground coal mine explosion control method selection. To identify potential risks of a methane explosion, a data gathering survey was conducted as part of the suggested hybrid methodology. The fuzzy AHP was used to compute the fuzzy weights of the hazards. "Improper ventilation system" is ranked highest out of the 34 sub-risk factors. The fuzzy TOPSIS was then utilized to rank the explosion control methods using the weights. To assess the viability of the study's conclusions, a sensitivity analysis was carried out. The findings indicate that "improving safety technology" and "financial investments" are the best ways to reduce such events. The results additionally indicate that the fuzzy TOPSIS approach in combination with the fuzzy AHP provides a helpful framework for dynamically assessing mine methane explosion accidents.
| S-EPMC10824880 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic pain is one of the most common complaints of cancer patients. There are many pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment modalities used for the treatment of pain. Nonetheless, non-pharmacological interventions are preferred because of potential side effects in cases resistant to medical therapy that require a dose increase or potent drug use. In most real-life situations, the decision on which technique to choose is based on the clinical but subjective decisions of the practitioners. This study aimed to find out the best non-pharmacological treatment option for patients with chronic cancer pain by following a rational and reasonable approach. METHODS:Since the evaluation of treatment options requires to make a comparison between a number of alternatives in the light of certain criteria, we utilize the order relation analysis (G1-method) which is a method for determining the weights based on the improved Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The method uses the relative importances on prioritizing the four criteria and eight sub-criteria defined by the experts of three pain physicians, one oncologist, and one oncologic surgeon. Four alternatives are then compared according to the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) using the verbal subjective judgments of the practitioners. RESULTS:Obtained results indicate that the general medical condition of the patient and the stage of the cancer are the essential factors in the selection of the treatment method. It is followed by the extent of the pain and the level of evidence, respectively. According to the evaluations performed, spinal port and splanchnic nerve radiofrequency thermocoagulation treatments are the first and second priority methods for pain treatment, respectively, compared to lumbar epidural catheter and celiac plexus block. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study emphasize the need to integrate critical criteria into the decision-making process objectively. This is the first study in which multi-criteria decision-making tools are used in the evaluation and selection of pain management methods in cancer patients.
| S-EPMC6794880 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Supplier selection and segmentation are crucial tasks of companies in order to reduce costs and increase the competitiveness of their goods. To handle uncertainty and dynamicity in the supplier segmentation problem, this research thus proposes a new dynamic generalized fuzzy multi-criteria group decision making (MCGDM) approach from the aspects of capability and willingness and with respect to environmental issues. The proposed approach defines the aggregated ratings of alternatives, the aggregated weights of criteria, and the weighted ratings by using generalized fuzzy numbers with the effect of time weight. Next, we determine the ranking order of alternatives via a popular centroid-index ranking approach. Finally, two case studies demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed dynamic approach. The applications show that the proposed appoach is effective in solving the MCGDM in vague environment.
| S-EPMC7833157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sports tourism represents a novel industrial manifestation of the profound integration between the tourism and sports sectors. The objective of this research is to examine an innovative multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method for the sustainability evaluation of sports tourism. The largest innovations are the expression and treatment of ambiguous data and interdependent evaluation criteria in the sports tourism sustainability evaluation process. On the one hand, intricate assessment data is represented using linguistic neutrosophic numbers (LNNs), which employ three linguistic variables to convey uncertainty and imprecision. On the other hand, to effectively capture the interrelationships among inputs, two novel aggregation operators are proposed. They are devised based on the Einstein operations and Heronian mean operators of LNNs. Subsequently, a linguistic neutrosophic evaluation method utilizing the aforementioned operators is presented. Comparative and sensitivity analyses conclude that great interdependence exists among five different dimensions of sustainability evaluation in sports tourism, and the proposed method can reflect the interrelations among inputs without redundant calculations.
| S-EPMC10947702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Water desalination by membrane distillation (MD) can be affected by a wide range of operating parameters. The present work uses combinational approach of Analytical Hierarch process (AHP) and Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy process (Fuzzy-AHP) to identify the most important parameters in the MD desalination. Five process parameters and key-performance indicators, named derivable outputs (DOs), are considered, along with the critical factors affecting these DOs in the current study. The DOs and the critical influencing factors (CIFs) are selected based on their experimental feasibility. The investigation involves five DOs, which are liquid entry pressure, thermal power consumption, permeate quality, permeate flux, and pumping (feed circulation) power. A total of twenty-five critical influencing factor were associated with the DOs. The identification of the DOs and CIFs was based on the literature review, and further analyses were performed. Both methods, AHP and Fuzzy-AHP, determined six extremely important CIFs in the desalination MD, which are feed temperature, feed concentration, or feed salinity; feed flow rate; membrane hydrophobicity; pore size; and membrane material. Moderately important CIFs are found to be four by both methods. These common CIFs are feed solution properties, membrane thickness, feed channel geometry, and pressure difference along the feed channel. Finally, the least preferred CIFs are four common in both methods that are MD configuration, duration of test, specific heat of feed solution, and viscosity.
| S-EPMC7996794 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Expert assessments with pre-defined numerical or language terms can limit the scope of decision-making models. We propose that decision-making models can incorporate expert judgments expressed in natural language through sentiment analysis. To help make more informed choices, we present the Sentiment Analysis in Recommender Systems with Multi-person, Multi-criteria Decision Making (SAR-MCMD) method. This method compiles the opinions of several experts by analyzing their written reviews and, if applicable, their star ratings. The growth of online applications and the sheer amount of available information have made it difficult for users to decide which information or products to select from the Internet. Intelligent decision-support technologies, known as recommender systems, leverage users' preferences to suggest what they might find interesting. Recommender systems are one of the many approaches to dealing with information overload issues. These systems have traditionally relied on single-grading algorithms to predict and communicate users' opinions for observed items. To boost their predictive and recommendation abilities, multi-criteria recommender systems assign numerous ratings to various qualities of products. We created, manually annotated, and released the technique in a case study of restaurant selection using 'TripAdvisor reviews', 'TMDB 5000 movies', and an 'Amazon dataset'. In various areas, cutting-edge deep learning approaches have led to breakthrough progress. Recently, researchers have begun to focus on applying these methods to recommendation systems, and different deep learning-based recommendation models have been suggested. Due to its proficiency with sparse data in large data systems and its ability to construct complex models that characterize user performance for the recommended procedure, deep learning is a formidable tool. In this article, we introduce a model for a multi-criteria recommender system that combines the best of both deep learning and multi-criteria decision-making. According to our findings, the suggested system may give customers very accurate suggestions with a sentiment analysis accuracy of 98%. Additionally, the metrics, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score are where the system truly shines, much above what has been achieved in the past.
| S-EPMC10495971 | biostudies-literature