Abstract
When evaluating the quality of non-dominated sets, two families of quality indicators are frequently used: unary quality indicators (UQI) and binary quality indicators (BQI). For several years, UQIs have been considered inferior to BQIs. As a result, the use of UQIs has been discouraged, even when in practice they are easier to use. In this work, we study the reasons why UQIs are considered inferior. We make a detailed analysis of the correctness of these reasons and the implicit assumptions in which they are based. The conclusion is that, contrary to what is widely believed, unary quality indicators are not inferior to binary ones. © 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Lizárraga, G., Gomez, M. J., Castañon, M. G., Acevedo-Davila, J., & Rionda, S. B. (2009). Why unary quality indicators are not inferior to binary quality indicators. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 5845 LNAI, pp. 646–657). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-05258-3_57
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.
