MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comprehensive Hybrid Framework for Risk Analysis in the Construction Industry Using Combined Failure Mode and Effect Analysis, Fault Trees, Event Trees, and Fuzzy Logic

2011· article· en· W2003671662 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Construction Engineering and Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault tree analysisEvent tree analysisEvent treeEvent (particle physics)Fuzzy logicComputer scienceFailure mode and effects analysisRisk analysis (engineering)Reliability engineeringRisk managementReliability (semiconductor)Data miningTree (set theory)EngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nature of the construction industry is characterized by many risks and uncertainty inherent in every phase of the project life cycle. Risk management, therefore, is essential for a construction project to succeed in fulfilling its project objectives. In conventional event-tree analysis, the probability of the risk event, the probability of failure/success of different mitigation strategies, and the consequences of different paths must be assessed to allow for quantitative event-tree analysis. However, conducting quantitative event-tree analysis, especially in construction projects, entails several difficulties attributed to the lack of sufficient data. To overcome this challenge, this paper presents a comprehensive framework in which experts can use linguistic terms rather than numerical values to conduct event-tree analysis and calculate the expected monetary value (EMV) of risk events. The proposed framework is based on combining failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), fault trees, event trees, and fuzzy logic. This paper allows experts to express themselves linguistically to calculate the EMV of risk events, which is more appropriate for the construction domain. In addition, this paper introduces a comprehensive framework for risk management that combines three well-known techniques in reliability engineering in a novel way that considers the often subjective quality of risk-related data. The application of fuzzy logic provides an effective tool to handle subjectivity in the construction domain. The proposed framework is implemented in the form of two software tools entitled Risk Criticality Analyzer and Fuzzy Reliability Analyzer. To validate the framework, a case study is presented and the EMV is calculated using the proposed approach. The result of the proposed approach is then compared to the result obtained using Monte Carlo simulation, demonstrating that the proposed framework gives similar results to Monte Carlo simulation but provides the advantage of allowing experts to express themselves linguistically, making the proposed framework more practical and easier to apply in the construction domain.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it