LessmannSBaesensBSeowHV, et al.
Benchmarking state-of-the-art classification algorithms for credit scoring: an update of research. Eur J Operation Res2015;
247: 124–136.
2.
KorkasCDBaldiSMichailidisI, et al.
Intelligent energy and thermal comfort management in grid-connected microgrids with heterogeneous occupancy schedule. Appl Energy2015;
149: 194–203.
3.
TrestianROrmondOMunteanGM.Performance evaluation of MADM-based methods for network selection in a multimedia wireless environment. Wireless Netw2015;
21: 1745–1763.
4.
ManglaSKKumarPBaruaMK.Prioritizing the responses to manage risks in green supply chain: an Indian plastic manufacturer perspective. Sustaina Prod Consump2015;
1: 67–86.
5.
AminAShehzadSKhanC, et al. Churn Prediction in Telecommunication Industry Using Rough Set Approach[M]//New Trends in Computational Collective Intelligence. 2015.
6.
WeiCFeiLXieJ, et al.
An energy management approach for the mechanical manufacturing industry through developing a multi-objective energy benchmark. Energy Convers Manag2017;
132: 361–371.
7.
KimYChungESJunSM.Iterative framework for robust reclaimed wastewater allocation in a changing environment using multi-criteria decision making. Water Resour Manage2015;
29: 295–311.
8.
WangX.A comprehensive decision making model for the evaluation of green operations initiatives. Technol Forecast Soc Change2015;
95: 191–207.
9.
GerpottTJAhmadiN.Regaining drifting mobile communication customers: predicting the odds of success of winback efforts with competing risks regression. Expert Syst Appl2015;
42: 7917–7928.
10.
SalehJHTorrespadillaJPMorganE, et al.
Utilization rates of geostationary communication satellites: models of loading dynamics. J Spacecr Rockets2015;
43: 903–909.
11.
BoutkhoumOHanineMBoukhrissH, et al.
Multi-criteria decision support framework for sustainable implementation of effective green supply chain management practices. Springerplus2016;
5: 664.
12.
RenJLiangH.Measuring the sustainability of marine fuels: a fuzzy group multi-criteria decision making approach. Transp Res D Transp Environ2017;
54: 12–29.
13.
GothwalSRajT.Analyzing the factors affecting the flexibility in FMS using weighted interpretive structural modeling (WISM) approach. Int J Sys Assur Eng Manag2017;
8: 1–15.
