Premium
Clusters, Criteria and Calibration—a Reply to Hauser and Peniwati
Author(s) -
Wedley William C.,
Schoner Bertram,
Choo Eng Ung
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
journal of multi‐criteria decision analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.462
H-Index - 47
eISSN - 1099-1360
pISSN - 1057-9214
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-1360(199612)5:4<267::aid-mcda125>3.0.co;2-p
Subject(s) - axiom , axiom independence , independence (probability theory) , calibration , mathematical economics , scaling , mathematics , function (biology) , point (geometry) , calculus (dental) , statistics , medicine , geometry , dentistry , evolutionary biology , biology
Hauser and Peniwati have criticized our papers on the grounds that (1) clusters are not criteria and (2) transformable multiple‐criteria problems are really single‐criterion problems. They claim that the axiom of independence only applies to criteria. Although in agreement with several of their statements, we point out that the axiom applies to levels and that criteria priorities must perform a calibration (scaling) function if composite ratio results are to be achieved.