Many decision problems cannot be solved exactly and use several estimationalgorithms that assign scores to the different available options. Theestimation errors can have various correlations, from low (e.g. between twovery different approaches) to high (e.g. when using a given algorithm withdifferent hyperparameters). Most aggregation rules would suffer from thisdiversity of correlations. In this article, we propose different aggregationrules that take correlations into account, and we compare them to naive rulesin various experiments based on synthetic data. Our results show that whensufficient information is known about the correlations between errors, amaximum likelihood aggregation should be preferred. Otherwise, typically withlimited training data, we recommend a method that we call Embedded Voting (EV).