Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 23;17:14. doi: 10.1186/s12911-017-0409-5

Table 5.

Linguistic evaluation of alternatives by each expert

Expert 1 C1 C2 C3 C4
C11 C12 C21 C22 C31 C32 C41 C42
A1 VG VG F G VG G VG G
A2 F P G F VG P F F
A3 G F F G F F VG F
Expert 2 C1 C2 C3 C4
C11 C12 C21 C22 C31 C32 C41 C42
A1 G F G F F V F F
A2 VG VG VG G G VG VG G
A3 F G P F G F F G
Expert 3 C1 C2 C3 C4
C11 C12 C21 C22 C31 C32 C41 C42
A1 F F G F F G P F
A2 G G VG G G VG F G
A3 F VG F F F F P F