Cited by 630Multi-Criteria Decision MakingFuzzy Systems and OptimizationReliability and Maintenance Optimization

Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis using fuzzy weighted geometric mean

Wang, Ying-Ming, Chin, Kwai-Sang, Poon, Gary Ka Kwai, Yang, Jian-Bo·2009·Expert Systems with Applications

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eswa.2007.11.028

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, Y.-M., Chin, K.-S., Poon, G. K. K., & Yang, J.-B.
Affiliations
City University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Wang, Ying-Ming
Venue
Expert Systems with Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-03
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
1195-1207
ISSN
0957-4174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1983686086
Cited by
630
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 22
FWCI
12.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Systems with Applications (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Fuzzy Systems and Optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Reliability and Maintenance Optimization
Keywords
failure mode and effects analysis, fuzzy risk priority number, risk priority number, fuzzy linguistic terms, alpha-cuts, centroid defuzzification, failure mode prioritization, risk factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review