Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Comparison of a new expert elicitation model with the Classical Model, equal weights and single experts, using a cross-validation technique

10 references·4 citing·35 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2006Uncertain Judgements: Eliciting Experts' Probabilities1,549 cited
2002Heuristics and Biases506 cited
1993Experts in uncertainty403 cited
2010A route to more tractable expert advice333 cited
2007TU Delft expert judgment data base319 cited
2008Developing an Event Tree for probabilistic hazard and risk assessment at Vesuvius245 cited
2007The ‘Heuristics and Biases’ Bias in Expert Elicitation222 cited
1999The Mathematics of Natural Catastrophes212 cited
2008Comment on Cooke's classical method98 cited
2007On the performance of social network and likelihood-based expert weighting schemes81 cited

Cited by

2013Quantifying scientific uncertainty from expert judgement elicitation130 cited
2018Eliciting improved quantitative judgements using the IDEA protocol: A case study in natural resource management129 cited
2020Weighting and aggregating expert ecological judgments50 cited
2012Combining Experts’ Judgments: Comparison of Algorithmic Methods Using Synthetic Data43 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work