How this is calculated
Inspect the versioned inputs.
| Constant | Value | Scope & source |
|---|---|---|
| preferenceProfiles | {"Traditional electric":{"stones":5,"lower-air-temperature":1,"fuel-ritual":0,"simple-controls":4,"wet-steam":0},"Infrared":{"stones":0,"lower-air-temperature":5,"fuel-ritual":0,"simple-controls":5,"wet-steam":0},"Wood-fired":{"stones":5,"lower-air-temperature":1,"fuel-ritual":5,"simple-controls":1,"wet-steam":0},"Steam room":{"stones":0,"lower-air-temperature":4,"fuel-ritual":0,"simple-controls":3,"wet-steam":5}} editorial fit scale 0–5 | Subjective compatibility model for named features; not measured quality, health benefit, energy use or clinical suitability. All-zero priorities produce no ranking; ties use alphabetical order. editorial-tool-method ↗ah-auburn-price ↗ah-harmony-price ↗harvia-wood-heating ↗ Verified 2026-11-08 |
Input defaults that are not sourced measurements are illustrative planning assumptions. Exact unit definitions, the 52-week convention and algorithm details are in the shared methodology.
Worked example
An example you can inspect.
With only lower-air-temperature preference weighted, infrared ranks higher on that feature definition. Weighting water-on-stones instead changes the result to traditional electric.
Choose what the weights mean for you.
Each priority runs from zero to five. Zero removes that feature from the comparison, while a larger number gives it greater influence relative to your other selected priorities. The ratings for each heating approach are published editorial judgments on the displayed features. They are not measurements of health benefit, evidence strength or individual satisfaction. Inspect those ratings before accepting the output, and keep a note of any product-specific feature that differs from the simplified profile.
Read the weighted mean correctly.
For each approach, the tool multiplies each rating by its priority, adds those products and divides by the sum of priorities. The result stays on the feature-rating scale. Multiplying all your nonzero priorities by the same factor would leave the ranking unchanged because both numerator and denominator change together. A score is therefore a summary of relative preferences, not a percentage chance of success. If every priority is zero, the denominator has no meaningful weight and the tool returns no ranking.
Use ties and sensitivity as useful information.
A tie means the selected weights and editorial profiles do not distinguish the options. Small differences should also prompt a closer look at the actual equipment rather than false precision. Change one priority at a time to see which preferences drive the result. If a minor change reverses the ranking, the comparison is sensitive to that assumption. That is useful decision context, not a failure to produce a decisive winner. The tool keeps the reasons visible so the arithmetic can be challenged.
Move from a profile to an actual project.
After exploring priorities, compare named products on installation requirements, usable dimensions, supply, operating instructions, warranty and quoted scope. The matrix does not replace those checks and does not translate one heating mode's temperatures or minutes into another's physiological exposure. The PDF records the current weights and result as a planning note. Revisit it if your requirements change, and read the separate evidence material for research questions rather than importing a preference score into a medical-benefit claim.
Questions, considered
Questions about this tool
How should I interpret the infrared vs traditional decision tool result?
Editorial feature scores are subjective and deliberately inspectable. A product may differ from the category example; compare its actual specification and calculate running costs separately. Adjust five feature priorities and inspect how an editorial weighted comparison changes between infrared and traditional electric sauna.
Which assumptions matter in the infrared vs traditional decision tool?
Each priority uses 0–5 weight. Score = Σ(weight × published feature rating) / Σ(weights). Compare feature fit only. The same published compatibility matrix drives the matchmaker; no medical effect, universal efficiency or quality score is included. No ranking appears when all priorities are zero. Equal scores are shown as a tie, rather than evidence of a universal winner.
Primary sources
Follow the source.
- Published tool assumptions and preference scoring ↗
Editorial assumptions, input defaults, uncertainty and validation
Explicit site-authored conventions, not external scientific evidence.
Checked 2026-11-08 - Almost Heaven Auburn 2–3 Person Indoor Sauna ↗
Main price; selected Traditional/Hemfir, 6 kW KIP with dials; Features and Specifications
Displayed base price $4,577. Includes heater and stones; existing floor used. Traditional cabin example only. Verify selected finish and availability at checkout. Do not reuse the page's medical or 100%-humidity marketing.
Checked 2026-11-08 - Almost Heaven Harmony Infrared 2–3 Person Sauna ↗
Main price and Size: 2 Person; Features
Displayed two-person promotional price $5,162.49 and comparison price $7,374.99. Clear hemlock and carbon-panel heating. Product page says 120 V, dedicated 20 A outlet; no actual wattage was read, so do not equate outlet capacity with operating power.
Checked 2026-11-08