[SOLVED] Can u understand this text (part 3) ?

[aaron792]

I am a ubuntu fan from China.
Now I am doing a Chinese-English translation job.
The translation would be sent to some serious native English speaker to view.
I want to confirm my translation is natural and understandable.
Then guys, can u spare some time to give me a check or help to express my idea in a more fluent and natural way?
Many thanks!
Any advice and correction is appreciated!:)
AHP -- Analytic Hierarchy Process
DMP -- Decision-making Problem


A notable feature of the AHP is that rather than directly
assigning numbers for every alternative to describe their
advantages under a certain criterion, Satty pairwise compare the
alternatives with respect to a certain criterion to first form a judgment
matrix. Then with some mathmatical manipulations of the judgment
matrix a priority vector is attained to indicate the advantages of
each alternative in terms of the certain criterion. Such treatment
has reasons. In judging each alternative's advantage under a certain
criterion, the AHP essentially relies on the decision maker's (DM)
subjective comparison ablity. There are two kinds of comparison
ablities for human. One is absolute comparison and the other one is
relative comparison. In absolute comparison one is required to evaluate
an object's property based on an objective standard or baseline. In
relative comparison two alternatives are compared in pairs accoring to a
common attribute. From common sense and general knowledge, it is thought
man's relative comparison judgment are more reliable and accurate. For example,
holding one stone in hand one can hardly tell its exact weight in gram
unit ensuring the error does not exceed +/- 10g. While if two stones in
hands, even if their weights differ by a few grams (some scientific text
report such difference can be as small as 0.5 gram ), man can correctly
discern the heavier one. In the AHP, such fact means assigning numbers
for each alternative with respect to a criterion would not generate data
as precise and reliable as pairwise compareing the alternatives with
respect to the same criterion. In other words, priority vector w
reflecting each alternative's advantage to the criterion can not be
directly obtained without losing precision and reliablity. To obtain w,
we need first form a judgment matrix A by means of compareing all the
alternatives in pair. Then with some mathmatical treatment, priority vector
w can be figured out. That is just the approach Saaty used to compute
priority vector in the AHP.

This part is a little long and it also contains some arguable opinions.
Any comments or discussion about the idea or text is welcome.
For this translation part, i try to use "advantage" to express an idea of
"costs and benefits". I feel such expression is not natural. But i can not
pick out a more proper word from my vocabulary. Any advice?

After this posting I am going to bed. This may delay my response to the replies
of this thread. Hope no one would mind~
Thanks!
See u tomorrow~

[LeoSolaris]

A notable feature of the AHP is that rather than directly assigning numbers for every alternative to describe their advantages under a certain criterion, Satty compares the alternatives with respect to a certain criterion to first form a judgment matrix. Then with some mathematical manipulations of the judgment matrix a priority vector is attained to indicate the advantages of each alternative in terms of the certain criterion. Such treatment has reasons. In judging each alternative's advantage under a certain criterion, the AHP essentially relies on the decision maker's (DM) subjective comparison ability.


There are two kinds of comparison abilities for human. With absolute comparison, one is required to evaluate an object's property based on an objective standard or baseline. In relative comparison two alternatives are compared according to a common attribute. From common sense and general knowledge, it is thought man's relative comparison judgment are more reliable and accurate. For example, by holding a stone in hand, one can hardly tell its exact weight in grams. However, if one has two stones to compare, even if their weights differ by a few grams (some scientific text report such difference can be as small as 0.5 gram ), a person can correctly discern the heavier one.


In the AHP, this means assigning numbers for each alternative with respect to a criterion would not generate data as precise and reliable as comparing the alternatives with respect to the same criterion. In other words, priority vector w, reflecting each alternative's advantage to the criterion, can not be directly obtained without losing precision and reliability. To obtain w, we need to first form a judgment matrix A by means of comparing all the alternatives. Then, with some mathematical treatment, the priority vector w can be figured out.






There ya go, to the best of my ability. I write for pleasure to be honest, but I am attending college for an MBA (Masters in Business Administration) and I am a native US English speaker.

There are subtle differences in English, its rules and uses vary according to where you are. Business and academic writings tend to be a little more universal, though, so I put that in standard format, and removed the redundant phrases. Your use of "advantages" was well placed and did not need changing. I got rid of "pairwise" because it is not used unless the distinction is not clear in the writing, and in this case it was already implied by the sentences. I did use spellcheck to catch a couple of odd spelling errors, but nothing serous. I have certainly typed worse mistakes.

As for the subject matter, I am not sure I completely agree. There are uses for this type of comparison, but they are not always more precise that direct measurement. Direct measurement will always be more precise when it is possible. It is not always possible, which is why this form of comparative mathematics evolved. This situation comes up more frequently in human interaction (like business) rather than the scientific fields. Competitive advantage does not have a direct measurement in the same way a rock can be directly measured for weight, mass, or dimensions. Without the tools needed to measure those qualities, then this comparative analysis is highly useful, but still not as precise as measuring tools could be if they exist or are available.

Hope it goes over well!
Leo

P.S. There should be three spaces at the start of each paragraph, but HTML formatting removes them. The spaces serve to break up long lines of text, especially when there is no space between the paragraphs. Without them the eye tends to 'forget' which line it was on. It's the same kind of idea in breaking up telephone numbers in short series of numbers rather than a long string of numbers, it's easier to read and remember.

[aeiah]

A notable feature of the AHP is that rather than directly assigning numbers for every alternative to describe their advantages under a certain criterion, Satty compares the alternatives with respect to a certain criterion to first form a judgment matrix. Then with some mathematical manipulations of the judgment matrix a priority vector is attained to indicate the advantages of each alternative in terms of the certain criterion. Such treatment has reasons. In judging each alternative's advantage under a certain criterion, the AHP essentially relies on the decision maker's (DM) subjective comparison ability.


There are two kinds of comparison abilities for humans. With absolute comparison, one is required to evaluate an object's property based on an objective standard or baseline. In relative comparison two alternatives are compared according to a common attribute. From common sense and general knowledge, it is thought man's relative comparison judgment are more reliable and accurate. For example, holding one stone in hand one can hardly tell its exact weight in gram unit ensuring the error does not exceed +/- 10g. While if two stones in hands, even if their weights differ by a few grams (some scientific text report such difference can be as small as 0.5 grams ), man can correctly discern the heavier one.


In the AHP, this means assigning numbers for each alternative with respect to a criterion would not generate data as precise and reliable as comparing the alternatives with respect to the same criterion. In other words, priority vector w, reflecting each alternative's advantage to the criterion, can not be directly obtained without losing precision and reliability. To obtain w, we need to first form a judgment matrix A by means of comparing all the alternatives in pair. Then, with some mathematical treatment, the priority vector w can be figured out.


:guitar:

[aaron792]

A notable feature of the AHP is that rather than directly assigning numbers for every alternative to describe their advantages under a certain criterion, Satty compares the alternatives with respect to a certain criterion to first form a judgment matrix. Then with some mathematical manipulations of the judgment matrix a priority vector is attained to indicate the advantages of each alternative in terms of the certain criterion. Such treatment has reasons. In judging each alternative's advantage under a certain criterion, the AHP essentially relies on the decision maker's (DM) subjective comparison ability.


There are two kinds of comparison abilities for human. With absolute comparison, one is required to evaluate an object's property based on an objective standard or baseline. In relative comparison two alternatives are compared according to a common attribute. From common sense and general knowledge, it is thought man's relative comparison judgment are more reliable and accurate. For example, by holding a stone in hand, one can hardly tell its exact weight in grams. However, if one has two stones to compare, even if their weights differ by a few grams (some scientific text report such difference can be as small as 0.5 gram ), a person can correctly discern the heavier one.


In the AHP, this means assigning numbers for each alternative with respect to a criterion would not generate data as precise and reliable as comparing the alternatives with respect to the same criterion. In other words, priority vector w, reflecting each alternative's advantage to the criterion, can not be directly obtained without losing precision and reliability. To obtain w, we need to first form a judgment matrix A by means of comparing all the alternatives. Then, with some mathematical treatment, the priority vector w can be figured out.






There ya go, to the best of my ability. I write for pleasure to be honest, but I am attending college for an MBA (Masters in Business Administration) and I am a native US English speaker.

There are subtle differences in English, its rules and uses vary according to where you are. Business and academic writings tend to be a little more universal, though, so I put that in standard format, and removed the redundant phrases. Your use of "advantages" was well placed and did not need changing. I got rid of "pairwise" because it is not used unless the distinction is not clear in the writing, and in this case it was already implied by the sentences. I did use spellcheck to catch a couple of odd spelling errors, but nothing serous. I have certainly typed worse mistakes.

As for the subject matter, I am not sure I completely agree. There are uses for this type of comparison, but they are not always more precise that direct measurement. Direct measurement will always be more precise when it is possible. It is not always possible, which is why this form of comparative mathematics evolved. This situation comes up more frequently in human interaction (like business) rather than the scientific fields. Competitive advantage does not have a direct measurement in the same way a rock can be directly measured for weight, mass, or dimensions. Without the tools needed to measure those qualities, then this comparative analysis is highly useful, but still not as precise as measuring tools could be if they exist or are available.

Hope it goes over well!
Leo

P.S. There should be three spaces at the start of each paragraph, but HTML formatting removes them. The spaces serve to break up long lines of text, especially when there is no space between the paragraphs. Without them the eye tends to 'forget' which line it was on. It's the same kind of idea in breaking up telephone numbers in short series of numbers rather than a long string of numbers, it's easier to read and remember.


Thank u very much, Leo!
Your correction is just what i am needing. I am sorry this may take u a not-short period of time.
As u are working for your MBA, i am labouring for a Ph.D in an institute affiliated to the Chinese Science Academy (CAS). This paragragh is actually an exerpt from my paper to be submitted to an international conference. I am not the lazy man who asks for other people's help without contributing his own strength.
But as for my not-good-enough English, the paper has been refused twice. Really Bad！Right? :(

I agree with your opinion about the different uses of indirect comparison and direct measurement in different situations. Actually I add in my text that it's only in the situation that measuring tools are not available relative comparison generate more reliable and accurate results.

Thanks again for your enthusiastic help and conscientious correction (hope i didn't use these two adj wrong, i am not quite familiar with their uses.) . As i see u are working as a businiess postgraduate, i suggest u Satty's AHP decision-making theory as a must-read. It was widely used and applied in all kinds of DMP.

I like talking and exchanging thouhts with people from different countries and different cultures. Creative thoughts come from such interactions!
THANKS AGAIN!
Best regards!:)
Aaron

[aaron792]

A notable feature of the AHP is that rather than directly assigning numbers for every alternative to describe their advantages under a certain criterion, Satty compares the alternatives with respect to a certain criterion to first form a judgment matrix. Then with some mathematical manipulations of the judgment matrix a priority vector is attained to indicate the advantages of each alternative in terms of the certain criterion. Such treatment has reasons. In judging each alternative's advantage under a certain criterion, the AHP essentially relies on the decision maker's (DM) subjective comparison ability.


There are two kinds of comparison abilities for humans. With absolute comparison, one is required to evaluate an object's property based on an objective standard or baseline. In relative comparison two alternatives are compared according to a common attribute. From common sense and general knowledge, it is thought man's relative comparison judgment are more reliable and accurate. For example, holding one stone in hand one can hardly tell its exact weight in gram unit ensuring the error does not exceed +/- 10g. While if two stones in hands, even if their weights differ by a few grams (some scientific text report such difference can be as small as 0.5 grams ), man can correctly discern the heavier one.


In the AHP, this means assigning numbers for each alternative with respect to a criterion would not generate data as precise and reliable as comparing the alternatives with respect to the same criterion. In other words, priority vector w, reflecting each alternative's advantage to the criterion, can not be directly obtained without losing precision and reliability. To obtain w, we need to first form a judgment matrix A by means of comparing all the alternatives in pair. Then, with some mathematical treatment, the priority vector w can be figured out.


:guitar:

Thanks, aeiah!
Though u didn't speak much, i know u spend not a little time to reply to this thread.
Now thanks to you and leo's efforts this part passed. I send u my best gratitude!:)
Have fun, guy!
Regards!
Aaron