Of these criteria, efficiency, which is determined by a cost-benefit index, is by far the most important.
In terms of noise control barriers, our alternative strategy therefore includes further criteria: efficiency and minimization of negative effects.
Its structure, operating strategy, and controller have been designed considering the following criteria: efficiency, power quality, SOFC lifetime and robustness in stability and performance.
Examples of the design criteria, efficiency calculation and application efficiency of these two measures, as well as case studies on the application of ecotechnological measures in watershed management in various regions, have been considered.
The priorities of all main decision criteria (efficiency, health gain, satisfaction and investment) and all sub-criteria related to the same main criterion sum up to one.
We now examine how t* varies according to the following criteria: efficiency, Youden's J, maximum value of the OR and the minimum cost basis where we choose a range of r (some values of r, of course, having already been included in efficiency and the J index) and a constrained optimisation approach where we choose three values of FN (1%, 5% and 10%).
We evaluate the intervention along two criteria: an efficiency criterion, which quantifies the number of HIV infections averted, and an equity criterion, which quantifies the likelihood of access that each adult male individual has to MC, regardless of his province.
The impact of the MC intervention is assessed according to two comparable criteria: an epidemiologic efficiency criterion and an equity criterion.
Second, the relation between the criterion of efficiency determining the content of the law and the efficiency of the actual behavior induced under the legal rule is unclear.
The second criterion is efficiency: we must keep down the costs of emission reduction, using prices or taxes wherever possible.
