Weight determination for consistently ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis
By Chiang Kao. 2010
187 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Control and Systems Engineering, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/53f4a6ad9add9390d10e60877c8ae73a12e5fa8c
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Control and Systems Engineering
- Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
- Zenonas Turskis
- Salvatore Greco
- Alessio Ishizaka
- Gianpiero Torrisi
- Jurgita Antucheviciene
- Menelaos Tasiou
- Mehdi Keshavarz-Ghorabaee
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas
- Zenonas Turskis
- Jurgita Antucheviciene
- Alessio Ishizaka
- Salvatore Greco
- Gianpiero Torrisi
- Menelaos Tasiou
- Mehdi Keshavarz-Ghorabaee
Citations in the corpus
- A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications (2012, methodology): “Simulation methods 8 3 PROMETHEE 3 0.8 VIKOR 7 2.6 MAUT 2 0.8 SAW 7 2.6 SERVQUAL 2 0.8”
- On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness (2018, background): “For this reason, a number of techniques exist in the literature that arrive at a common weighting scheme (e.g. see, among others, Despotis 2005a; Hatefi and Torabi 2010; Kao 2010; Morais and Camanho 2011; Sun et al. 2013).”
- Determination of Objective Weights Using a New Method Based on the Removal Effects of Criteria (MEREC) (2021, methodology): “In these methods, we do not use direct data on the significance of criteria expressed by decision-makers [21].”