Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intuitionistic fuzzy interpretations of multi-criteria multi-person and multi-measurement tool decision making

Atanassov, Krassimir, Pasi, Gabriella, Yager, Ronald·2005·International Journal of Systems Science

Abstract

Intuitionistic fuzzy sets are extensions of fuzzy sets. Their elements have two degrees – a degree of membership and a degree of non-membership so that their sum is smaller or equal to 1. Intuitionistic fuzzy interpretations of the processes of multi-person and of multi-measurement tool multi-criteria decision makings are discussed in this paper.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00207720500382365

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 336

Metadata

Authors
Atanassov, K., Pasi, G., & Yager, R.
Venue
International Journal of Systems Science
Published
2005-11-15
Volume
36
Issue
14
Pages
859-868
ISSN
  • 0020-7721 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5319
OpenAlex
W2092716173
Cited by
336
References
1
FWCI
6.80
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: Intuitionistic fuzzy interpretations of multi-criteria multi-person and multi-measurement tool decision making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00207720500382365
The paper
Atanassov, K., Pasi, G., & Yager, R. (2005). Intuitionistic fuzzy interpretations of multi-criteria multi-person and multi-measurement tool decision making. International Journal of Systems Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207720500382365

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.