CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 88Risk and Safety AnalysisMaritime Navigation and SafetyMaritime Ports and Logistics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk assessment for berthing of hazardous cargo vessels using Bayesian networks

Khan, Rafi Ullah, Yin, Jingbo, Mustafa, Faluk Shair, Anning, Ni·2021·Ocean & Coastal Management
DOI 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105673
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105673

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Abimbola, 2015, Safety and risk analysis of managed pressure drilling operation using Bayesian network, Saf. Sci., 76, 133, 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.01.010 · DOI
  2. Afenyo, 2017, Arctic shipping accident scenario analysis using Bayesian Network approach, Ocean Eng., 133, 224, 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.02.002 · DOI
  3. Ahmed, 2013, Automatic ship berthing using artificial neural network trained by consistent teaching data using nonlinear programming method, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., 26, 2287, 10.1016/j.engappai.2013.08.009 · DOI
  4. Akyuz, 2015, A methodological extension to human reliability analysis for cargo tank cleaning operation on board chemical tanker ships, Saf. Sci., 75, 146, 10.1016/j.ssci.2015.02.008 · DOI
  5. Akyuz, 2016, A hybrid human error probability determination approach: the case of cargo loading operation in oil/chemical tanker ship, J. Loss Prev. Process. Ind., 43, 424, 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.06.020 · DOI
  6. Baalisampang, 2018, Review and analysis of fire and explosion accidents in maritime transportation, Ocean Eng., 158, 350, 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.04.022 · DOI
  7. Bubbico, 2009, Preliminary risk analysis for LNG tankers approaching a maritime terminal, J. Loss Prev. Process. Ind., 22, 634, 10.1016/j.jlp.2009.02.007 · DOI
  8. Budipriyanto, 2017, A simulation study of collaborative approach to berth allocation problem under uncertainty, The Asian J. Shipp. Logist., 33, 127, 10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.09.003 · DOI
  9. Cunha, 2015, Review on hazardous and noxious substances (HNS) involved in marine spill incidents—an online database, J. Hazard Mater., 285, 509, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2014.11.005 · DOI
  10. Eleye-Datubo, 2006, Enabling a powerful marine and offshore decision-support solution through Bayesian network technique, Risk Anal., 26, 695, 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00775.x · DOI
  11. Ellis, 2011, Analysis of accidents and incidents occurring during transport of packaged dangerous goods by sea, Saf. Sci., 49, 1231, 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.04.004 · DOI
  12. Gruenefeld, 2018, vol. 12
  13. Huang, 2015, Facts related to August 12, 2015 explosion accident in Tianjin, China, Process Saf. Prog., 34, 313, 10.1002/prs.11789 · DOI
  14. Inanloo, 2015, Explosion impacts during transport of hazardous cargo: GIS-based characterization of overpressure impacts and delineation of flammable zones for ammonia, J. Environ. Manag., 156, 1, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.02.044 · DOI
  15. John, 2014, An integrated fuzzy risk assessment for seaport operations, Saf. Sci., 68, 180, 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.04.001 · DOI
  16. Karthikeyan, 2019, vol. 21, 6
  17. Khakzad, 2011, Safety analysis in process facilities: comparison of fault tree and Bayesian network approaches, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 96, 925, 10.1016/j.ress.2011.03.012 · DOI
  18. Khakzad, 2013, Quantitative risk analysis of offshore drilling operations: a Bayesian approach, Saf. Sci., 57, 108, 10.1016/j.ssci.2013.01.022 · DOI
  19. Khan, 2020, Risk assessment and decision support for sustainable traffic safety in Hong Kong waters, IEEE Access, 8, 72893, 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988201 · DOI
  20. Kuzu, 2017, Analytic comparison of different mooring systems, Global Perspect.: Towards Sustain. Green Integr. Maritime Transport, 265
  21. Li, 2014, Bayesian network with quantitative input for maritime risk analysis, Transportmetrica A: Transport Sci., 10, 89, 10.1080/18128602.2012.675527 · DOI
  22. Li, 2014, Ship safety index, Transport. Res. Pol. Pract., 66, 75, 10.1016/j.tra.2014.04.016 · DOI
  23. Neuparth, 2011, Hazardous and Noxious Substances (HNS) in the marine environment: prioritizing HNS that pose major risk in a European context, Mar. Pollut. Bull., 62, 21, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2010.09.016 · DOI
  24. Ren, 2008, A methodology to model causal relationships on offshore safety assessment focusing on human and organizational factors, J. Saf. Res., 39, 87, 10.1016/j.jsr.2007.09.009 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Ren, 2009, An offshore risk analysis method using fuzzy Bayesian network, J. Offshore Mech. Arctic Eng., 131, 41101, 10.1115/1.3124123 · DOI
  26. Sciberras, 2018, The UN's 2030 Agenda for sustainable development and the maritime transport domain: the role and challenges of IMO and its stakeholders through a grounded theory perspective, WMU J. Maritime Affairs, 17, 435, 10.1007/s13437-018-0147-2 · DOI
  27. Trbojevic, 2000, Risk based methodology for safety improvements in ports, J. Hazard Mater., 71, 467, 10.1016/S0304-3894(99)00094-1 · DOI
  28. Vidmar, 2018, Safety assessment of crude oil tankers, Saf. Sci., 105, 178, 10.1016/j.ssci.2018.02.009 · DOI
  29. Wang, 2020, The multi-state maritime transportation system risk assessment and safety analysis, Sustainability, 12
  30. Wang, 2016, Bayesian network-based risk assessment for hazmat transportation on the middle route of the south-to-north water transfer project in China, Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess., 30, 841, 10.1007/s00477-015-1113-6 · DOI
  31. Xie, 2010, Estimation and application of a Bayesian network model for discrete travel choice analysis, Transport. Lett., 2, 125, 10.3328/TL.2010.02.02.125-144 · DOI
  32. Yang, 2010, A survey on hazardous materials accidents during road transport in China from 2000 to 2008, J. Hazard Mater., 184, 647, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.08.085 · DOI
  33. Yang, 2018, Realising advanced risk-based port state control inspection using data-driven Bayesian networks, Transport. Res. Pol. Pract., 110, 38, 10.1016/j.tra.2018.01.033 · DOI
  34. Yeo, 2016, Dynamic risk analysis of offloading process in floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) platform using Bayesian Network, J. Loss Prev. Process. Ind., 41, 259, 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.04.002 · DOI
  35. Zhao, 2012, Analysis of factors that influence hazardous material transportation accidents based on Bayesian networks: a case study in China, Saf. Sci., 50, 1049, 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.12.003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 88

Metadata

Authors
Khan, R. U., Yin, J., Mustafa, F. S., & Anning, N.
Affiliations
Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
Corresponding author
Yin, Jingbo
ORCID
Venue
Ocean & Coastal Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-09
Volume
210
Pages
105673
ISSN
0964-5691 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105673
OpenAlex
W3171355605
Cited by
88
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 2
FWCI
10.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
Ocean & Coastal Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Risk and Safety Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Maritime Navigation and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Maritime Ports and Logistics
Keywords
ship berthing, risk assessment, Bayesian networks, binary logistic regression, expert opinion, maritime accidents, environmental pollution, ship crew training, wind force, water velocity, channel width, port location, risk management

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