臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究之目的在於透過分析網路程序法以及模糊推論建置出一個飛航作業風險評估模型，此模型表現了所考量的風險因素之間的關係。分析網路程序法（ANP）是一種適應於多準則的決策方式，它是在層級分析法(AHP)的基礎上發展而形成的一種決策方法，其允許考量風險因素之間的相互依存關係。而透過模糊推論以量化以及正規化領域專家所制定的各種風險評估，最終基於實際數據以驗證模型的可行性以及評估其效能性。

This study presents a flight operation risk assessment model by using the technologies of Analytic Network Process (ANP) and Fuzzy inference. The proposed model has a network structure to represent the relationship of concerned risk factors. The analytic network process (ANP) is a more general form of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) used in multi-criteria decision analysis, which allows consideration of the interdependence of concerned risk factors. The use of fuzzy inference enables the quantification of qualitative risk assessments by domain experts. Experiments based on practical data are conducted to evaluate the validation and performance of the proposed model.

目錄
壹、 緒論 1
1.1. 研究背景與動機 1
1.2. 研究目的 6
1.3. 研究方法 7
貳、 相關研究 9
2.1 飛航風險分析相關研究 9
2.1.1 飛航安全風險模型(ASRM) 9
2.1.2 缺失危害分析(FHA) 10
2.1.3 失效模式、效應和關鍵性分析(FMECA) 10
2.1.4 風險概率分析(PRA) 11
2.2 飛航作業風險評估系統(FORAS) 11
2.3 分析網路程序法 16
2.3.1 分析網路程序法簡介 16
2.3.2 AHP/ANP相關文獻 20
參、 ANP飛安風險推論模型 23
3.1 風險因子的決定 25
3.2 風險因子的權重衡量－分析網路程序法(ANP) 28
3.3 風險推估資料的前置處理(Fuzzy) 37
3.4 最終風險值推論 40
肆、 案例實作 42
4.1航班起飛風險推論 42
4.2 系統效能分析 51
伍、 結論與建議 54
陸、 文獻 55


圖目錄
圖1 1 2005-2011年的全球航運量(資料來源: ICAO) 2
圖1 2 2005-2012年的事故紀錄(資料來源: ICAO) 2
圖1 3 FORAS樹狀階層的節點的歸屬函數 4
圖1 4 FORAS-Sector Threat樹狀階層架構 6
圖1 5 研究流程架構 8
圖2 1 FORAS系統架構圖(Michael, 1999) 13
圖2 2 關鍵路徑評估推論範例圖 14
圖2 3 飛航風險推論雲端架構(葉鎰維，民102) 15
圖2 4 分析網路程序法架構 19
圖2 5 超級矩陣 20
圖3 1 飛航風險推論流程 24
圖3 2 風險準則之間的關係 27
圖3 3 航班起飛之ANP分析層級圖 29
圖3 4 航班資訊 37
圖3 5 TC03(英語能力)的Membership Function 39
圖4 1 未加權超級矩陣 44
圖4 2 已加權超級矩陣 45
圖4 3 極限矩陣 46

表目錄
表1 1 R1的模糊規則表 5
表2 1 九點評估尺度表 17
表2 2 應用AHP/ANP法於各種領域之相關研究 21
表3 1 目標「起飛」下之風險準則以及各自的風險因素 26
表3 2 九點評估尺度表 30
表3 3 起飛風險的8個群組的成對比較問卷範例 31
表3 4 起飛風險底下之特徵向量w1的問卷結果 33
表3 5 w22(機場跑道複雜度的風險因素)之特徵向量 34
表3 6 w23(航空交通管制的風險因素)之特徵向量 34
表3 7 w24(機組人員溝通能力的風險因素)之特徵向量 35
表3 8 w25(經驗的風險因素)之特徵向量 35
表3 9 w26(疲勞程度的風險因素) 35
表3 10 w28(天氣狀況的風險因素)之特徵向量 35
表4 1 風險準則優先權重 47
表4 2 BR1之終端節點資料與正規化後風險值 48
表4 3 BR2之終端節點資料正規化後風險值 49
表4 4 BR3之終端節點資料與正規化後風險值 50
表4 5 BR1、BR2、BR3本研究與FORAS結果比較表 51
表4 6 三十筆航班風險推論比較表 53

[1]陳奕翔，《飛行操作風險評估系統(FORAS)之風險因素權重分析》，碩士論文，國立成功大學民航研究所，2007。
[2]黃清賢，《危害分析與風險評估》，第二版，三民書局出版，ISBN：978-957-142-312-8，2011。
[3]黃敬元，《基於FORAS之高飛航風險航班關鍵因素搜尋》，碩士論文，淡江大學資訊管理學系，2011。
[4]張紹勳，《模糊多準則評估法及統計》，五南圖書出版，ISBN:978-957-11-6583-7，2012。
[5]葉鎰維，《基於雲端運算的飛航作業風險評估架構》，碩士論文，淡江大學資訊管理學系，2012。
[6]Blair, A. R., Nachtmann, R., Saaty, T. L., & Whitaker, R. “Forecasting the resurgence of the US economy in 2001: An expert judgment approach.” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, (36:2), 2002, pp. 77-91.
[7]Dr. Michael Stamatelatos, Probabilistic Risk Assessment: What Is It And Why Is It Worth Performing It?
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/qnews/pra.pdf , accessed 2013.
[8]Flight Safety Foundation, Guide to methods & tools for airline flight safety analysis, http://flightsafety.org/files/analytical_methods_and_tools.pdf , accessed 2012.
[9]Hsu, H. M., Wey, W. M. and Tsai, P. J.” The Applications of Analytic Network Process to Priorities of Interdependent Housing Project Selection.” Journal of Architecture, vol. 62, pp. 49-74, 2007.
[10] International Civil Aviation Organization, 2013 Safety Report ICAO, http://www.icao.int/safety/Documents/ICAO_2013-Safety-Report_FINAL.pdf, accessed 2013/05/29.
[11] Jharkharia, S., & Shankar, R. “IT enablement of supply chains: Modeling the enablers.” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, (53:8), 2004, pp. 700-712.
[12] Kamiyama, N. “Designing data center network by analytic hierarchy process.” Computer Networks, (57:3), 2012, pp. 658-667.
[13] Kim, S., & Whang, K. “Forecasting the capabilities of the Korean civil aircraft industry.” Omega, (21:1), 1993, pp. 91-98.
[14] Lee, J. W., & Kim, S. H. “Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. “Computers & Operations Research, (27:4), 2000, pp. 367-382.
[15] Lee, J. W., & Chang, Y. “Risk assessment model on flight-safety management.” Transportation Planning Journal, vol. 34, 2005, pp. 145-176.
[16] Luxhoj, J. T. “Probabilistic causal analysis for system safety risk assessments in commercial air transport,” Proceedings of the Workshop on Investigating and Reporting of Incidents and Accidents, 2003, pp. 1738-1750.
[17] Luxhoj, J. T., & Coit, D. W. “Modeling low probability/high consequence events: An aviation safety risk model.” Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 2006. RAMS''06. Annual, pp. 215-221.
[18] Michael, H., John, M., “Flight Operations Risk Assessment System (FORAS),” International Air Safety Seminar, Flight Safety Foundation, 2002.
[19] Michael, H., Osborne, D.M., Ross, D., Boyd, D., and Brown, B.G., “The Flight Operations Risk Assessment System,” Proceedings of the SAE Advances Safety Conference, Society of Automotive Engineers, Jan. 1999.
[20] Niemira, M. P., & Saaty, T. L. “An analytic network process model for financial-crisis forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting,” (20:4), 2004, pp. 573-587.
[21] Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC), Fact Sheet on Probabilistic Risk Assessment, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/probabilisticd-risk-asses.html , accessed 2013.
[22] Partovi, F. Y. “An analytical model of process choice in the chemical industry.” International Journal of Production Economics, (105:1), 2007, pp. 213-227.
[23] Saaty, T. L. & Takizawa, Masahiro, “Dependence and independence: From linear hierarchies to nonlinear networks,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 26, 1986, pp. 229-237.
[24] Saaty, T. L., Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process, Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publication, 1996.
[25] Saaty, T. L., The analytic network process, Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publication, 2001.
[26] Saaty, T. L., Theory and applications of the analytic network process: Decision making with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications, 2005.
[27] System Safety Handbook: Practices and Guidelines for ConductingSystem Safety Engineering and Management, December 2000. FederalAviation Administration [On-line], http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/riskmanagement/ss_handbook/media/Chap9_1200.pdf , accessed 2012
[28] Ulengin, F., & Ulengin, B. “Forecasting foreign exchange rates: A comparative evaluation of AHP.” Omega, (22:5), 1994, pp. 505-519.
[29] Waller, R. A. &Covello, V. T. “Low-robability/high-consequence risk analysis”, Plenum Press New York; London, 1984.
[30] W. K. Lee and Y. H. Chang, “Applying the fuzzy FMECA to assess the risks of flight-safety,” Civil Aviation Journal, vol. 7, pp. 1–22, 2005.
[31] YuKsel, S. (2007). “An integrated forecasting approach to hotel demand.” Mathematical and Computer Modeling, (46:7), 2007, pp. 1063-1070.