2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2006.10.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A simplified CREAM prospective quantification process and its application

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
69
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 117 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
69
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The notation can be taken into consideration to calculate the total HEP value of the whole tasks. Table 3 shows the notation in line of the rules to find the total HEP values (He et al, 2008).…”
Section: Ahp Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The notation can be taken into consideration to calculate the total HEP value of the whole tasks. Table 3 shows the notation in line of the rules to find the total HEP values (He et al, 2008).…”
Section: Ahp Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This value can be calculated by deducting the number of reduced CPCs from improved CPCs which is depicted in Eq. (1) where X denotes the number of reduced CPCs and Y denotes the number of improved CPCs (He et al, 2008).…”
Section: Design a Risk-based Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…us, if a particular industry wants to understand its specific problems, it must collect data from scratch [34]. (2) Over-reliance on expert judgment: In the existing HRA method, the evaluation of factors that influence human errors (performance-shaping factors (PSFs)) and the probability of occurrence rely mainly on the subjective judgment of experts, which can easily cause a large random error [20,31,35,36] Despite these gaps, Liao et al [37] had proposed a human error model based on the CREAM that includes more variables that capture the characteristics of construction projects.…”
Section: Challenges Of Human Reliabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%