Incident tree model and incident tree analysis method for quantified risk assessment: An in-depth accident study in traffic operation

Safety Science

Volumn 48, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1248-1262

  Wang, Wuhong ^a   Jiang, Xiaobei ^a   Xia, Shuangchen ^a   Cao, Qi ^b  

^a BEIJING INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

^b SOUTHWEST JIAOTONG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Fault tree; Fuzzy set; Incident tree analysis; Information flow; Quantified risk assessment

Indexed keywords

AMOUNT OF INFORMATION; ANALYSIS METHOD; FAULT-TREES; FUZZY INFORMATION; HARDWARE FAULTS; HUMAN ERRORS; IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS; INCIDENT TREE ANALYSIS; INFORMATION FLOWS; INFORMATION TRANSFORMATIONS; LOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS; PROBABILITY STATISTIC; QUANTIFIED RISK ASSESSMENTS; SOFTWARE FAILURE; STRUCTURED PROCESS; SYSTEM FAILURES; SYSTEM LEVELS; SYSTEM OPERATION; TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS; TRAFFIC OPERATION; TREE MODELS;

ACCIDENTS; ERRORS; FAULT TREE ANALYSIS; FUZZY SETS; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

QUALITY ASSURANCE;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CASE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SYSTEM; FUZZY SYSTEM; INCIDENT TREE ANALYSIS METHOD; INCIDENT TREE MODEL; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT; TRAFFIC SAFETY;

EID: 77956226860     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.04.002     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Amari, S., Dill, G., Howald, E., 2003. A new approach to solve dynamic fault trees. In: Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, pp. 374-379.
2. Andrews J.D., Moss T.R. Reliability and Risk Assessment 2002, ASME. second ed.
3. Bedford T., Cooke R.M. Probabilistic Risk Analysis: Foundations and Methods 2001, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
4. Bier V.M. Challenges to the acceptance of probabilistic risk analysis. Risk Analysis 1999, 19(4):703-710.
5. Bouissou M., Bon J.L. A new formalism that combines advantages of fault-trees and Markov models: Boolean logic driven Markov processes. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2003, 82(2):149-163.
6. Cepin M., Mavko B. A dynamic fault tree. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2002, 7:83-91.
7. Chanda R.S., Bhattacharjee P.K. A reliability approach to transmission expansion planning using fuzzy fault tree model. Electric Power Systems Research 1998, 45:101-108.
8. Chang H.H., Jong H.K., Lee Seung Jun, Seong Poong Hyun Investigation on relationship between information flow rate and mental workload of accident diagnosis tasks in NPP. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 2006, 53(3):1450-1459.
9. Conant R.C. Laws of information which govern systems. IEEE Transactions on System, Man, Cybernation 1976, 6:240-255. 1976.
10. Doytchin E.D., Gerd S. Combining task analysis and fault tree analysis for accident and incident analysis: a case study from Bulgaria. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2009, 41:1172-1179.
11. Dugan J.B., Bavuso S.J., Boyd M.A. Dynamic fault-tree for fault-tolerant computer systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1992, 41(3):363-376.
12. Frank J.G., Carol S., Mosleh A. QRAS-the quantitative risk assessment system. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2006, 91:292-304.
13. Furuta H., Shiraishi N. Fuzzy importance in fault tree analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1984, 12:205-213.
14. Hamada M., Martz H.F., Reese C.S., Graves T., Johnson V., Wilson A.G. A fully Bayesian approach for combining multilevel failure information in fault tree quantification and optimal follow-on resource allocation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2004, 86:297-305.
15. Hamada M., Martz H.F., Reese C.S., Graves T., Johnson V., Wilson A.G. A fully Bayesian approach for combining multilevel failure information in fault tree quantification and optimal follow-on resource allocation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2004, 86(3):297-305.
16. Harold E.R., Brian M. System Safety Engineering and Management 1990, John Wiley & Sons.
17. Helbing D., Hendrik A., Christian K. Information flows in hierarchical networks and the capability of organizations to successfully respond to failures, crises, and disasters. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 2006, 363(1):141-150.
18. Kennedy R., Kirwan B. Development of hazard and operability-based method for identifying safety management vulnerabilities in high risk system. Safety Science 1998, 30:249-274.
19. Kumamoto H. Satisfying Safety Goals by Probabilistic Risk Assessment 2007, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany.
20. Kuzminski P., Eisele J.S., Garber N., Schwing R., Haimes Y.Y., li D., Chowdhury M. Improvement of high safety I: identification of causal factors through fault-tree modeling. Risk Analysis 1995, 15(3):293-312.
21. Leveson N. A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Safety Science 2004, 42(4):237-270.
22. Lotte Larsen. Methods of multidisciplinary in-depth analyses of road traffic accidents. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2004, 111:115-122.
23. Majdara A., Wakabayashi T. Component-based modeling of systems for automated fault tree generation. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2009, 94:1076-1086.
24. Malaterre G. Error analysis and in-depth accident studies. Ergonomics 1990, 33:1403-1421.
25. Margaret G., Pete T., Bradford M. Conducting in-depth accident studies. Safety Science 1995, 19:119-124.
26. Mark H., Catholijn M.J., Jan T., Marian V. Agent-based analysis and support for incident management. Safety Science 2009, 47(8):1163-1174.
27. Markku V.A., Erkki U., Jorma S., Mari A., Tuufa R., Kari V. The accident consequence tree method and its application by real-time data collection in the finish furniture industry. Safety Science 1996, 23(1):11-26.
28. Metin C., Seyed iri Li., Wang J. A risk-based modeling approach to enhance shipping accident investigation. Safety Science 2010, 48:18-27.
29. Mohaghegh Z., Mosleh A. Incorporating organizational factors into probabilistic risk assessment of complex socio-technical systems: principles and theoretical foundations. Safety Science 2009, 47:1139-1158.
30. Niels P.H., Wolfgang K. Risk analyses of transportation on road and railway from a European Perspective. Safety Science 2002, 40:337-357.
31. Pan H.S., Yun W.Y. Fault tree analysis with fuzzy gates. Computers and Industrial Engineering 1997, 33:569-572.
32. Pate-Cornell M.E. Fault tree vs. event trees in reliability analysis. Risk Analysis 1984, 4(3):177-186.
33. Paul D.H. Incorporating human dependent failures in risk assessments to improve estimates of actual risk. Safety Science 1996, 22:177-194.
34. Rao K.D., Gopika V., Sanyasi Rao V.V.S., Kushwaha H.S., Verma A.K., Srividya A. Dynamic fault tree analysis using Monte Carlo simulation in probabilistic safety assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2009, 94:872-883.
35. Reason J., Manstead A., Stradling S., Baxter J., Campbel K. Errors and violations on the roads: a real distinction. Ergonomics 1990, 33:1315-1332.
36. Refaul F., Faisal K., Brian V., Paul R.A. Methodology for computer aided fuzzy fault tree analysis. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2009, 87:217-226.
37. Shannon C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 1948, 27:379-656.
38. Singer D. A fuzzy set approach to fault tree and reliability analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1990, 34:145-155.
39. Siu N. Risk Assessment for dynamic systems: an overview. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1994, 43(1):43-73.
40. Song J. Statistical Information Analysis: The Information Processing in Management Economic and Production 1986, Nankai University press, Tianjing.
41. Swaminathan S., Smidts C. The event sequence diagram framework for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 1999, 63(1):73-90.
42. Tanaka H., Fan L., Taguchi K. Fault tree analysis by fuzzy probability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1983, 32:453-457.
43. Tarek S., Walid A., Frank N. Identifying accident-prone location using fuzzy pattern recognition. Journal of Transport Engineering 1995, 121:352-358.
44. Vemuri K.K., Dugan J.B. Automatic synthesis of fault trees for computer-based systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability 1999, 48(4):394-402.
45. Wang W.H. Driving Behaviour Theory and Method in Road Transport System 2001, Science Press, Beijing.
46. Wang W.H. A digital driving system for smart vehicle. IEEE Intelligent Systems 2002, 17(5):81-83.
47. Wang Y., Teague T., West H., Mannan S. A new algorithm for computer-aided fault tree synthesis. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 2002, 15(4):265-277.
48. Wang W.H., Bubb H., Ikeuchi K., Cao Q. Measurement of dangerous traffic conditions through driving dependability analysis. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 2010, 69(4):254-258.
49. Wang W.H., Cao Q. Human Errors Identification within Human Reliability Analysis 1999, Southwest Jiaotong University Press, Chengdu.
50. Wang Y., West H.H., Hasan N., Mannan M.S. QRA study of an activated carbon filter safeguard system. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 2005, 83:191-196.
51. Xiang, J., Futatsugi, K., He, Y., 2004. Fault tree and formal methods in system safety analysis. In: The Fourth International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, September 14-16, Wuhan, China, 1108-1115.
52. Yuge T., Yanagia S. Quantitative analysis of a fault tree with priority AND gates. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 2008, 93(11):1577-1583.
53. Zadeh L.A. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 1965, 8:338-353.