Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 389

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 132 of the 132 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Applications of Bayesian networks and Petri nets in safety, reliability, and risk assessments: A review

Open access
Kabir, Sohag, Papadopoulos, Yiannis·2019·Safety Science

Abstract

Abstract System safety, reliability and risk analysis are important tasks that are performed throughout the system life-cycle to ensure the dependability of safety-critical systems. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approaches are comprehensive, structured and logical methods widely used for this purpose. PRA approaches include, but not limited to, Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), and Event Tree Analysis (ETA). Growing complexity of modern systems and their capability of behaving dynamically make it challenging for classical PRA techniques to analyse such systems accurately. For a comprehensive and accurate analysis of complex systems, different characteristics such as functional dependencies among components, temporal behaviour of systems, multiple failure modes/states for components/systems, and uncertainty in system behaviour and failure data are needed to be considered. Unfortunately, classical approaches are not capable of accounting for these aspects. Bayesian networks (BNs) have gained popularity in risk assessment applications due to their flexible structure and capability of incorporating most of the above mentioned aspects during analysis. Furthermore, BNs have the ability to perform diagnostic analysis. Petri Nets are another formal graphical and mathematical tool capable of modelling and analysing dynamic behaviour of systems. They are also increasingly used for system safety, reliability and risk evaluation. This paper presents a review of the applications of Bayesian networks and Petri nets in system safety, reliability and risk assessments. The review highlights the potential usefulness of the BN and PN based approaches over other classical approaches, and relative strengths and weaknesses in different practical application scenarios.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.009

Cites

132 of 132 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 132 references

Cited by

See all 389

Metadata

Authors
Kabir, S., & Papadopoulos, Y.
Venue
Safety Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-06
Volume
115
Pages
154-175
ISSN
0925-7535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2911890521
Cited by
389
References
132
FWCI
28.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Applications of Bayesian networks and Petri nets in safety, reliability, and risk assessments: A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.009
The paper
Kabir, S., & Papadopoulos, Y. (2019). Applications of Bayesian networks and Petri nets in safety, reliability, and risk assessments: A review. Safety Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.