Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique
By S. Seyedhosseini, Nina Safaei, M. Asgharpour. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2006
430 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ff3229761aea2e9ec100b2b5278c350fdf8998b5
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Management Science and Operations Research
In Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
In Statistics and Probability
Citations in the corpus
- A value-created system of science (technology) park by using DEMATEL (2009, methodology): “, 2007; Wu, 2008; Wu & Lee, 2007), such as user interface (Hori & Shimizu, 1999), reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis (Seyed-Hosseini et al., 2006), developing global managers’ competencies (Wu & Lee, 2007), evaluating performance in e-learning programs (Tzeng ”
- Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: A literature review (2013, methodology): “Seyed-Hosseini, Safaei, and Asgharpour (2006) proposed a method called decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) for reprioritization of failure modes in a system FMEA for corrective actions.”
- Failure mode and effects analysis using a group-based evidential reasoning approach (2009, methodology): “[17] proposed a method called decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) for reprioritization of failure modes in FMEA, which prioritizes alternatives based on severity of effect or influence and direct and indirect relationships between them.”
- Fuzzy Rule-Based Bayesian Reasoning Approach for Prioritization of Failures in FMEA (2008, methodology): “• Modeling the direct and indirect relations between failure modes, and risk factors [ 22 ].”