The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Multiple Attribute Decision Making
Abstract
Decision makers are often faced with several conflicting alternatives. How do they evaluate trade-offs when there are more than three criteria? To help people make optimal decisions, scholars in the discipline of multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) continue to develop new methods for structuring preferences and determining the correct relative
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
Cited by
STATE OF ART SURVEYS OF OVERVIEWS ON MCDM/MADM METHODS
Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Kildienė, S. (2014) · Technological and Economic Development of Economy · doi:10.3846/20294913.2014.892037 · Cited by 931
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
Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM
Zavadskas, E. K., & Podvezko, V. (2016) · International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making · doi:10.1142/s0219622016500036 · Cited by 365
Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods for Integrated Rehabilitation Prioritization
Tscheikner-Gratl, F., Egger, P., Rauch, W., & Kleidorfer, M. (2017) · Water · doi:10.3390/w9020068 · Cited by 165
Tanim, A. H., Goharian, E., & Moradkhani, H. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-15237-z · Cited by 88
Metadata
- Authors
- Tzeng, G.-H., & Huang, J.-J.
- Venue
- Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks
- Publisher
- Chapman and Hall/CRC
- Published
- 2011-06-22
- OpenAlex
- W3150478326
- Cited by
- 1,659
- References
- 0
- Type
- reference entry
- 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: Multiple Attribute Decision Making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1201/b11032
- The paper
- Tzeng, G.-H., & Huang, J.-J. (2011). Multiple Attribute Decision Making. Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11032
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.
