Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35360662›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2022

Review of Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods in Finance Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence.

Jurgita Černevičienė, Audrius Kabašinskas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jurgita ČernevičienėDepartment of Mathematical Modelling, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Audrius KabašinskasDepartment of Mathematical Modelling, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The influence of Artificial Intelligence is growing, as is the need to make it as explainable as possible. Explainability is one of the main obstacles that AI faces today on the way to more practical implementation. In practise, companies need to use models that balance interpretability and accuracy to make more effective decisions, especially in the field of finance. The main advantages of the multi-criteria decision-making principle (MCDM) in financial decision-making are the ability to structure complex evaluation tasks that allow for well-founded financial decisions, the application of quantitative and qualitative criteria in the analysis process, the possibility of transparency of evaluation and the introduction of improved, universal and practical academic methods to the financial decision-making process. This article presents a review and classification of multi-criteria decision-making methods that help to achieve the goal of forthcoming research: to create artificial intelligence-based methods that are explainable, transparent, and interpretable for most investment decision-makers.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceexplainable artificial intelligence (XAI)financial decision-makinginterpretabilityinvestment decision-makingmultiple criteria decision aid (MCDA)

Identifiers

PMID35360662
PMCPMC8961419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.