Limits...
On the quality evaluation of scientific entities in Poland supported by consistency-driven pairwise comparisons method.

Koczkodaj WW, Kułakowski K, Ligęza A - Scientometrics (2014)

Bottom Line: The principal methodology was based on pairwise comparisons.For each single comparison, four criteria have been used.Theoretical bases for the whole procedure are based on a survey and its experimental results.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON Canada.

ABSTRACT
Comparison, rating, and ranking of alternative solutions, in case of multicriteria evaluations, have been an eternal focus of operations research and optimization theory. There exist numerous approaches at practical solving the multicriteria ranking problem. The recent focus of interest in this domain was the event of parametric evaluation of research entities in Poland. The principal methodology was based on pairwise comparisons. For each single comparison, four criteria have been used. One of the controversial points of the assumed approach was that the weights of these criteria were arbitrary. The main focus of this study is to put forward a theoretically justified way of extracting weights from the opinions of domain experts. Theoretical bases for the whole procedure are based on a survey and its experimental results. Discussion and comparison of the two resulting sets of weights and the computed inconsistency indicator are discussed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The overall survey results with the VIP and AGH UST employee groups
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4016810&req=5

Fig1: The overall survey results with the VIP and AGH UST employee groups

Mentions: Experts were chosen at random among those who know the specificity of Polish technical scientific units. Most of the experts are affiliated at the Polish universities or research institutes. Three experts are affiliated at foreign universities, although they worked at Polish universities in the past. Since the aim of the survey was to propose the weights for technical scientific units (including such units as the departments of mathematics, physics or computer science), hence most experts is working or has worked in such institutions. On the other hand, it was important for the authors of the survey that the experts came from different research centers. The best represented university is AGH UST—the place of work of the second and the third author. The representations of other 16 scientific units count from one to three experts. Out of the all respondents the authors chose the VIP group of six the most influential people consisting of distinguished professors and former or current members of official governmental and scientific bodies, including CERU. The overall results taking into account two special groups: VIP group and experts employed at the best represented AGH UST are shown below (Fig. 1).Fig. 1


On the quality evaluation of scientific entities in Poland supported by consistency-driven pairwise comparisons method.

Koczkodaj WW, Kułakowski K, Ligęza A - Scientometrics (2014)

The overall survey results with the VIP and AGH UST employee groups
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4016810&req=5

Fig1: The overall survey results with the VIP and AGH UST employee groups
Mentions: Experts were chosen at random among those who know the specificity of Polish technical scientific units. Most of the experts are affiliated at the Polish universities or research institutes. Three experts are affiliated at foreign universities, although they worked at Polish universities in the past. Since the aim of the survey was to propose the weights for technical scientific units (including such units as the departments of mathematics, physics or computer science), hence most experts is working or has worked in such institutions. On the other hand, it was important for the authors of the survey that the experts came from different research centers. The best represented university is AGH UST—the place of work of the second and the third author. The representations of other 16 scientific units count from one to three experts. Out of the all respondents the authors chose the VIP group of six the most influential people consisting of distinguished professors and former or current members of official governmental and scientific bodies, including CERU. The overall results taking into account two special groups: VIP group and experts employed at the best represented AGH UST are shown below (Fig. 1).Fig. 1

Bottom Line: The principal methodology was based on pairwise comparisons.For each single comparison, four criteria have been used.Theoretical bases for the whole procedure are based on a survey and its experimental results.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON Canada.

ABSTRACT
Comparison, rating, and ranking of alternative solutions, in case of multicriteria evaluations, have been an eternal focus of operations research and optimization theory. There exist numerous approaches at practical solving the multicriteria ranking problem. The recent focus of interest in this domain was the event of parametric evaluation of research entities in Poland. The principal methodology was based on pairwise comparisons. For each single comparison, four criteria have been used. One of the controversial points of the assumed approach was that the weights of these criteria were arbitrary. The main focus of this study is to put forward a theoretically justified way of extracting weights from the opinions of domain experts. Theoretical bases for the whole procedure are based on a survey and its experimental results. Discussion and comparison of the two resulting sets of weights and the computed inconsistency indicator are discussed.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus