The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Some remarks on the notion of compensation in MCDM
Bouyssou, D. (1986) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(86)90167-0 · Cited by 231
Cited by
(2013) · Cited by 1,331
Zavadskas, E. K., & Turskis, Z. (2011) · Technological and Economic Development of Economy · doi:10.3846/20294913.2011.593291 · Cited by 837
San Cristóbal, J. R. (2011) · Renewable Energy · doi:10.1016/j.renene.2010.07.031 · Cited by 710
Multi-criteria decision-making for flood risk management: A survey of the current state of the art
de Brito, M. M., & Evers, M. (2016) · Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences · doi:10.5194/nhess-16-1019-2016 · Cited by 435
Islam, M., Magnusson, M., Brown, R., Ayoko, G., Nabi, M., & Heimann, K. (2013) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en6115676 · Cited by 348
Metadata
- Authors
- Guitouni, A., & Martel, J.-M.
- Venue
- European Journal of Operational Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-09
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 501-521
- ISSN
- 0377-2217 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1986181470
- Cited by
- 880
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0377-2217(98)00073-3
- The paper
- Guitouni, A., & Martel, J.-M. (1998). Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method. European Journal of Operational Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(98)00073-3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
