1958
DOI: 10.1080/01621459.1958.10501479
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On Grouping for Maximum Homogeneity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
276
0
6

Year Published

2000
2000
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 621 publications
(282 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
276
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the weights are automatically defined once the subarray configuration has been determined, the original compromise problem reduces to that of finding the aggregation of array elements that optimizes the following cost functions: ∈ is the m-th sub-array index. In order to determine C a reduced set of solutions, called contiguous partitions [10], is considered. Successively, the exploration of the solution space is performed just modifying some elements of the solution called "border elements".…”
Section: Problem Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the weights are automatically defined once the subarray configuration has been determined, the original compromise problem reduces to that of finding the aggregation of array elements that optimizes the following cost functions: ∈ is the m-th sub-array index. In order to determine C a reduced set of solutions, called contiguous partitions [10], is considered. Successively, the exploration of the solution space is performed just modifying some elements of the solution called "border elements".…”
Section: Problem Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Un partitionnement univarié [18] a été utilisé pour regrouper les fruits en classes homogènes de pression de façon optimale en minimisant l'inertie intra-classe (figure 4). Les fruits retenus ont été ceux dont la valeur de la pression était la plus proche du barycentre de la classe à laquelle ils appartiennent.…”
Section: Constitution De Sous-lots Homogènes Reflétant L'hétérogénéitunclassified
“…S I is a MODL optimal discretization of S−S 1 . This interesting property is sufficient to adapt the dynamic programming algorithm presented in Fischer (1958), Lechevallier (1990), Fulton, Kasif, and Salzberg (1995) and Elomaa and Rousu (1996). We summarize in Table 1 this dynamic programming algorithm applied to the MODL discretization method.…”
Section: Optimal Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%