考虑组织者风险态度的通航危险源评估模型

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.05.025

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (5): 151-158.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.05.025

考虑组织者风险态度的通航危险源评估模型

熊升华¹ 讲师, 陈勇刚¹ 教授, 徐艺¹ 讲师, 伍毅¹ 讲师, 陈振颂^**2 副教授

1 中国民用航空飞行学院民航安全工程学院,四川广汉 618307;
2 武汉大学土木建筑工程学院,湖北武汉 430072

收稿日期:2019-01-04 修回日期:2019-03-18 发布日期:2020-11-02
通讯作者: **陈振颂(1988—),男,福建三明人,博士,副教授,主要从事决策理论与方法、智能控制与应用等方面的教学和研究工作。E-mail:zschen@whu.edu.cn。
作者简介:熊升华(1988—),男,四川眉山人,博士,讲师,主要从事决策理论与方法、民航安全管理等方面的教学和研究。E-mail:xsh@my.swjtu.edu.cn。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助(71801175, 71373222, 71871171); 中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(2042018kf0006, E20190421, E20190125); 民航局安全能力建设项目(14002600100017J003); 中国民航飞行学院科研基金资助(J2018-12, J2018-20, Q2019-109)。

General aviation hazard assessment model with consideration of decision-making moderators' attitude towards risks

XIONG Shenghua¹, CHEN Yonggang¹, XU Yi¹, WU Yi¹, CHEN Zhensong²

1 College of Civil Aviation Safety Engineering, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan Sichuan 618307, China;
2 School of Civil Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan Hubei 430072, China

Received:2019-01-04 Revised:2019-03-18 Published:2020-11-02

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为有效评估通航危险源的风险程度,构建考虑决策组织者风险态度的通航危险源评估模型。首先,基于国际民航组织(ICAO)推荐的危险源分类法梳理通航危险源评估指标体系;其次,针对以语义术语表征的多属性群决策(MAGDM)问题,提出变权语义幂均(VLPA)算子,并以此获取考虑决策组织者风险态度的群体评估信息;然后,综合考虑决策组织者的风险态度,阐述基于VLPA算子-距离熵的决策属性权重确定方法;最后,采用语义加权逼近理想解排序技术(TOPSIS)综合排序通航危险源的风险程度,并与传统的故障模式与影响分析(FMEA)方法对比分析。结果表明:组织因素和沟通人为因素是通航运行过程中需重点关注的2个危险源;与FMEA方法的一致排序结果证明所提方法的可行性,且该方法能更好地处理不同风险因子的乘积可能得到相同风险顺序数(RPN)值的情形。

关键词: 多属性群决策(MAGDM), 危险源, 风险态度, 熵权法, 逼近理想解排序技术(TOPSIS)

Abstract: In order to effectively assess the risk level of general aviation hazards, a novel general aviation hazard assessment model considering the risk attitude of decision-making moderators was proposed. Firstly, the assessment index system of general aviation hazards was constructed based on the hazard source classification approach recommended by International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Then, in terms of MAGDM problem represented by linguistic term, the Variable Linguistic Power Average (VLPA) operator was put forward, with which the group assessment information of decision-making moderators' attitude towards risk was obtained. Furthermore, with the risk attitude of decision-making moderators taken into consideration, an approach to determine the weight of decision-making attribute by combining the VLPA operator and distance entropy was elaborated. Finally, the linguistic weighted TOPSIS method was utilized to rank the risk level of general aviation hazards and the results were compared with the traditional Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) method. The results show that more attention should be paid to the two major hazards--organizational and communication factors in the process of general aviation operation; the ranking results consistent with FMEA method illustrate the feasibility of the proposed method which, moreover, can better deal with the situation where the product of different risk factors may obtain the same Risk Priority Number (RPN) value.

Key words: multi-attribute group decision making (MAGDM), hazards, risk attitude, entropy weight method, technique for order preference by similarity to an ideal solution (TOPSIS)

中图分类号:

X913.4

熊升华, 陈勇刚, 徐艺, 伍毅, 陈振颂. 考虑组织者风险态度的通航危险源评估模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 151-158.

XIONG Shenghua, CHEN Yonggang, XU Yi, WU Yi, CHEN Zhensong. General aviation hazard assessment model with consideration of decision-making moderators' attitude towards risks[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(5): 151-158.

参考文献

[1] 中国民用航空局. 印发《通用航空飞行任务审批与管理规定》的通知[EB/OL]. [2019-01-16]. http://www.caac.gov.cn/XXGK/XXGK/GFXWJ/201511/t20151102_8223.html.
[2] 郑红运, 吴立鹏, 陈道刚,等. 基于SEM的通用航空公司安全管理能力实证研究[J]. 中国民航飞行学院学报, 2015, 27(3): 14-18.
ZHENG Hongyun, WU Lipeng, CHEN Daogang. Empirical study on general aviation airlines safety management capability based on SEM[J]. Journal of Civil Aviation Flight University of China, 2015, 27(3): 14-18.
[3] SHYUR H J. A quantitative model for aviation safety risk assessment[J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2008, 54(1): 34-44.
[4] 高俊杰. 无人机安全飞行风险评估研究[D]. 广汉: 中国民用航空飞行学院, 2018.
GAO Junjie. Safety flight risk assessment study of unmanned aircraft[D]. Guanghan: Civil Aviation Flight University of China, 2018.
[5] 贺强, 徐艺, 马尧. 基于FCM的无人机飞行安全风险评估[J]. 民航学报, 2018, 2(1):31-34, 21.
HE Qiang, XU Yi, MA Yao. UAS flight safety risk assessment based on fuzzy cognitive maps[J]. Journal of Civil Aviation, 2018, 2(1):31-34, 21.
[6] 叶伟, 黄天彬. 机坪安全风险的多级模糊综合评价研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2011, 11(3): 231-235.
YE Wei, HUANG Tianbin. Renovated multilevel fuzzy integrated hazards assessment system for the airport apron safety[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2011, 11(3): 231-235.
[7] 夏正洪, 万健, 朱新平. 机场热点时空分布特征及运行风险评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(1): 93-98.
XIA Zhenghong, WAN Jian, ZHU Xinping. Research on spatial and temporal distribution characteristics of airport hotspots and airport operational risk assessment[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(1): 93-98.
[8] 王岩韬, 赵凝飞. 基于多算法协作的航班运行风险辨识研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(6): 166-172.
WANG Yantao, ZHAO Yifei. Research on flight operations risk identification based on multil-lgorithm collaboration[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018, 28(6): 166-172.
[9] 王岩韬, 唐建勋, 赵凝飞. 基于粗糙集和支持向量机的航班运行风险预测[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27 (9): 158-163.
WANG Yantao, TANG Jianxun, ZHAO Yifei. Prediction of risks in flight operations based on rough sets and support vector machine[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27 (9): 158-163.
[10] 高扬, 刘单单. 低空开放后终端区航空器碰撞风险模型研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2014, 24(6): 141-145.
GAO Yang, LIU Dandan. Research on model for aircrafts collision risk in terminal area after low altitude open[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2014, 24(6): 141-145.
[11] 徐耀玲, 唐五湘, 吴秉坚. 科技评估指标体系设计的原则及其应用研究[J]. 中国软科学, 2000(2): 48-51.
XU Yaolin, TANG Wuxiang, WU Bingjian. Design principle and application of S&T evaluation index system[J]. China Soft Science, 2000(2): 48-51.
[12] 赵鹏. 危险源概念辨析及识别方法[J]. 中国民用航空, 2010(7): 52-53.
ZHAO Peng. The concept of hazard and the methods to identify hazards[J]. China Civil Aviation, 2010(7): 52-53.
[13] LIU Huchen, LIU Long, LIU Nan. Risk evaluation approaches in failure mode and effects analysis: a literature review[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2013, 40(2): 828-838.
[14] VAHDANI B, SALIMI M, CHARKHCHIAN M. A new FMEA method by integrating fuzzy belief structure and TOPSIS to improve risk evaluation process[J]. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015, 77(1/2/3/4): 357-368.
[15] XU Zeshui. A method based on linguistic aggregation operators for group decision making with linguistic preference relations[J]. Information Sciences, 2004, 166(1/2/3/4): 19-30.
[16] HERRERA F, MARTINEZ L. A 2-tuple fuzzy linguistic representation model for computing with words[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2000, 8(6): 746-752.
[17] 刘培德, 关忠良. 一种基于二元语义的混合型多属性决策方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2009, 24(7): 1 074-1 077, 1 082.
LIU Peide, GUAN ZhongLiang. Hybrid multiple attribute decision making method based on 2-tuple[J]. Control and Decision, 2009, 24(7):1 074-1 077, 1 082.
[18] YAGER R R. The power average operator[J]. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 2001, 31(6): 724-731.
[19] 熊升华, 陈振颂, 李延来. 基于IFN输入的复杂系统关联MCGDM方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2015, 30(6): 1 065-1 077.
XIONG Shenghua, CHEN Zhensong, LI Yanlai. An interdependent multiple criteria group decision making method for complex systems based upon arguments with intuitionistic fuzzy numbers[J]. Control and Decision, 2015, 30(6): 1 065-1 077.
[20] 管清云, 陈雪龙, 王延章. 基于距离熵的应急决策层信息融合方法[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2015, 35(1): 216-227.
GUAN Qingyun, CHEN Xuelong, WANG Yanzhang. Distance entropy based decision-making information fusion method[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2015, 35(1): 216-227.
[21] XIONG Shenghua, CHEN Zhensong, CHIN K S. A novel MAGDM approach with proportional hesitant fuzzy sets[J]. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 2018, 11(1): 256-271.

考虑组织者风险态度的通航危险源评估模型

General aviation hazard assessment model with consideration of decision-making moderators' attitude towards risks

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	黄杰, 张显峰. 以南疆为例的区域暴恐袭击风险评估^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(2): 192-199.
[2]	王兴隆, 陈仔燕, 刘岩. 基于组合赋权法的空管监视信息质量评估^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(1): 41-50.
[3]	阎红巧, 陈怡玥, 田琨, 胡瑾秋, 冒亚明, 周靖桐. 企业安全生产关键指标体系与风险评价模型^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(9): 21-28.
[4]	姜福川, 周师, 吴增彤, 钟基超, 张书豪, 张雪芳. 基于熵权-TOPSIS法的煤矿安全投入决策分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 24-29.
[5]	王刚, 商荦真, 刘学麟, 唐礼, 程前. 采用AHP-熵权法的巷道启封中毒窒息致因研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 187-192.
[6]	鲁锦涛, 任利成, 戎丹, 郭昕曜. 基于灰色-物元模型的煤矿瓦斯爆炸风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(2): 99-105.
[7]	王起全, 刘志刚, 杨鑫刚, 刘建, 王睿智. 化工园区重大危险源风险情景构建分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(8): 63-69.
[8]	马辉, 吕航, 栾瑞斌. 基于空间单元分析的装配式建筑施工安全预警模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(5): 27-32.
[9]	付小艳, 聂兴信, 白存瑞, 赵好瑞, 高建. 矿山安检员执业能力影响因素耦合关系研究:基于涌现理论视角[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(2): 1-7.
[10]	傅贵, 吴亚丽, 章仕杰, 杨耀党. 危险源的实质内容分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(11): 1-5.
[11]	陈芳, 杨诗琪, 沈芮宇. 管制单位质量安全绩效关键因素识别与评价[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(10): 27-33.
[12]	蒋琴, 钟少波副, 朱伟. 京津冀地区森林火灾综合风险评估[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(10): 119-125.
[13]	宋雨欣. GUI下的高速铁路客运站安全评价系统^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S2): 134-137.
[14]	余敬芝, 燕飞, 牛儒. 基于Petri网的形式化安全分析方法^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S2): 138-143.
[15]	王燕, 尹盼盼, 沈梦露. 基于事故树的铁路客运站火灾风险因素分析^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S1): 44-47.