Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,801

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Note—A Preference Ranking Organisation Method: (The PROMETHEE Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making)

Brans, J. P., Vincke, Ph.·1985·Management Science

Abstract

Principles for a new family of outranking methods are given. The main aim of the proposed PROMETHEE approach is to be as easily understood as possible by the decision-maker. It is based on extensions of the notion of criterion. Six possible extensions are considered. These extensions can easily be identified by the decision-maker because the parameters to be defined (at most 2) have an economic significance. A valued outranking graph is constructed by using a preference index. Two possibilities are considered to solve the ranking problem by using this valued graph. PROMETHEE I provides a partial preorder and PROMETHEE II a total preorder on the set of the possible actions.

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 · 10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647

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.

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

Cited by

See all 2,801

Metadata

Authors
Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P.
Venue
Management Science
Published
1985-06
Volume
31
Issue
6
Pages
647-656
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W1748537427
Cited by
2,801
References
0
FWCI
1.93
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: Note—A Preference Ranking Organisation Method: (The PROMETHEE Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647
The paper
Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P. (1985). Note—A Preference Ranking Organisation Method: (The PROMETHEE Method for Multiple Criteria Decision-Making). Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647

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.