Commit 3808fdc8 by Markus Klinik

### wording

parent 5491836b
 ... @@ -128,8 +128,8 @@ Scalarization discards information and must be done carefully to not dismiss fav ... @@ -128,8 +128,8 @@ Scalarization discards information and must be done carefully to not dismiss fav Two common scalarization methods are the weighted-sum- and the weighted-product method. Two common scalarization methods are the weighted-sum- and the weighted-product method. \citet{Tofallis2014} highlights the disadvantages of the weighted-sum method and advocates using the weighted-product method. \citet{Tofallis2014} highlights the disadvantages of the weighted-sum method and advocates using the weighted-product method. He argues that the weighted-sum method requires normalization of the objectives, and the choice of the normalization method can produce different rankings. He argues that the weighted-sum method is unintuitive and error-prone to use. The weighted-product method does not require normalization and as such is not subject to to this source of subjectivity. The weighted-product method is easier to use and can capture user preferences more faithfully. Let $\vec{q} = \tuple{p_1, p_2, \ldots, q_1, q_2, \ldots}$ be an objective vector where the $p_i$ are more-is-better objectives and the $q_i$ are less-is-better objectives. Let $\vec{q} = \tuple{p_1, p_2, \ldots, q_1, q_2, \ldots}$ be an objective vector where the $p_i$ are more-is-better objectives and the $q_i$ are less-is-better objectives. Let $\vec{w} = \tuple{w_1, w_2, \ldots, v_1, v_2, \ldots}$ be the weights, pre-determined by the decision maker. Let $\vec{w} = \tuple{w_1, w_2, \ldots, v_1, v_2, \ldots}$ be the weights, pre-determined by the decision maker. ... @@ -141,11 +141,12 @@ Some of the properties of the weighted-product method relevant for c2 scheduling ... @@ -141,11 +141,12 @@ Some of the properties of the weighted-product method relevant for c2 scheduling \paragraph{Mixed units of measurement} \paragraph{Mixed units of measurement} This is the main reason why we chose the weighted-product method. This is the main reason why we chose the weighted-product method. The units and magnitudes of the individual objectives does not matter. The units and magnitudes of the individual objectives does not matter. One objective can be a distance in meters, another one a cost in euros, yet another one a time in seconds. No conversion or normalization is required, the numbers can be multiplied as-is. No conversion or normalization is required, the numbers can be multiplied as-is. One objective can be a distance in meters, another one a cost in euros, yet another one a time in seconds. \paragraph{Weights allow for diminishing returns} \paragraph{Weights allow for diminishing returns} \paragraph{Measurement theory} \paragraph{Measurement theory} All objectives must be units of ratio scale. All objectives must be units of ratio scale. For a unit of measurement to be of ratio scale, it must have a meaningful zero value that represents absence of the measured quantity, and must allow multiplication by positive constants. For a unit of measurement to be of ratio scale, it must have a meaningful zero value that represents absence of the measured quantity, and must allow multiplication by positive constants. ... ...
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!