1,720,964 research outputs found
Direct Monte Carlo Simulation for the Reliability Assessment of a Space Propulsion System Phased Mission
No full textSensitivity Analysis of the Weighted Fuzzy CREAM for the Assessment of Human Performance
No full textA Fuzzy methodology for human reliability analysis and its application to a steam generator tube rupture accident scenario
No full text
Quantitative Developments in the Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM) for the Assessment of Human Performance
No full text
Biased Monte Carlo Simulation Technique for Multi-State Network Unreliability Assessment
No full textA Fuzzy Logic Model for Taking Into Account Tasks Dependencies in Human Reliability Analysis
No full textThis paper presents a methodology for developing a Fuzzy Expert System to evaluate dependence between two human failure events in human reliability analysis. A working model of dependence is used to show the methodology. The main assets of the use of Fuzzy Expert System are the traceability, the transparency and repeatability given to the dependence evaluation process. Expert knowledge is elicited to identify the main influencing factors with respect to the dependence between two successive tasks. Then, the relationship of the input factors and the conditional human error probability is established through a set of transparent fuzzy logic rules. A case study is presented to demonstrate the proposed approach
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
