Jämför metoder

	Bayesiansk händelseträdsanalys	Bayesiansk analys av felmoder och effekter
Ämnesområde	Försöksplanering	Försöksplanering
Familj	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Ursprungsår	ETA: 1960s–1970s; Bayesian extension: 1990s–2000s	1990s–2000s
Upphovsperson	H.E. Watson (Bell Labs, fault tree); ETA formalized via US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Bayesian extension developed in reliability and risk engineering communities	Extension of classical FMEA (MIL-STD-1629, 1974) with Bayesian inference formalised in reliability literature from the 1990s onward
Typ	Probabilistic risk and reliability analysis technique	Probabilistic reliability and risk analysis
Ursprungskälla	Bearfield, G., & Marsh, W. (2005). Generalising event trees using Bayesian networks with a case study of train derailment. In G. Windeknecht et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Safety-Critical Systems Symposium. Springer.	Bowles, J. B., & Peláez, C. E. (1995). Fuzzy logic prioritization of failures in a system failure mode, effects and criticality analysis. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 50(2), 203–213.
Alias	Bayesian ETA, B-ETA, Probabilistic Event Tree Analysis, Bayesian Inductive Risk Model	Bayesian FMEA, probabilistic FMEA, B-FMEA, Bayesian risk priority analysis
Närliggande	5	5
Sammanfattning	Bayesian Event Tree Analysis (B-ETA) is a quantitative risk assessment method that extends classical event tree analysis by incorporating Bayesian inference to assign and update branch probabilities. Starting from an initiating event, it maps sequences of successes and failures through safety barriers, using prior distributions and observed evidence to produce posterior outcome probabilities. Widely used in nuclear safety, process industries, and system reliability engineering.	Bayesian FMEA extends the classical Failure Mode and Effects Analysis framework by replacing fixed point-estimate risk scores with probability distributions, allowing prior engineering knowledge and observed failure data to be formally combined through Bayes' theorem. The result is a probabilistic Risk Priority Number (RPN) that reflects uncertainty in severity, occurrence, and detectability ratings rather than masking it with single consensus values.