In the research of ship collision avoidance and automatic collision avoidance decision-making system, collision risk level is especially important. To evaluate the risk of ship collision, the nature of the risk level of ship collision is analyzed. Based on the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model based on improved AHP, the concepts of space collision risk and time collision risk are proposed, and the models for space collision risk, time collision risk and collision risk level are established at the same time. The model developed and perfected the concept of ship collision risk, and are more logical, laid a solid foundation for subsequent comprehensive evaluation.
CerikB.C., LeeK., ParkS.J., et al., Simulation of ship collision and grounding damage using Hosford-Coulomb fracture model for shell elements [J], Ocean Engineering173(1) (2019), 415–432.
2.
KimD.H., Identification of collision risk factors perceived by ship operators in a vessel encounter situation [J], Ocean Engineering200(5) (2020), 485–502.
3.
RobertoF.F., Results from the SuperModel Analysis of the X-COP Galaxy Clusters Sample [J], Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society3(2) (2019), 1800–1808.
4.
RoldánJ.B., MirandaE., González-CorderoG., et al., Multivariate analysis and extraction of parameters in resistive RAMs using the Quantum Point Contact model [J], Journal of Applied Physics123(1) (2018), 145–161.
5.
ZhangL. and MengQ., Probabilistic ship domain with applications to ship collision risk assessment [J], Ocean Engineering186(5) (2019), 1081–1094.
6.
Mujeeb-AhmedM.P., SeoJ.K. and PaikJ.K., Probabilistic approach for collision risk analysis of powered vessel with offshore platforms [J], Ocean Engineering151(1) (2018), 206–221.
7.
AriciS.S., AkyuzE. and ArslanO., Application of fuzzy bow-tie risk analysis to maritime transportation: The case of ship collision during the STS operation [J], Ocean Engineering194(6) (2020), 101–112.
8.
XieS., ChuX., ZhengM., et al., Ship predictive collision avoidance method based on an improved beetle antennae search algorithm [J], Ocean Engineering192(15) (2019), 1–19.
9.
XieS., GarofanoV., XiuminC., et al., Model predictive ship collision avoidance based on Q-learning beetle swarm antenna search and neural networks [J], Ocean Engineering193(4) (2019), 1–8.
10.
LiX. and TangW., Structural risk analysis model of damaged membrane LNG carriers after grounding based on Bayesian belief networks [J], Ocean Engineering171(1) (2019), 332–344.
11.
YoY. and LeeJ.S., Evaluation of ship collision risk assessments using environmental stress and collision risk models [J], Ocean Engineering191(1) (2019), 1–13.
12.
HuangY. and Van GelderP.H.A.J.M., Time-Varying Risk Measurement for Ship Collision Prevention [J], Risk Analysis40(1) (2020), 1–10.
13.
WangY.F., WangL.T., JiangJ.C., et al., Modelling ship collision risk based on the statistical analysis of historical data: A case study in Hong Kong waters [J], Ocean Engineering197(4) (2020), 106–112.
14.
WangZ., HuZ., LiuK., et al., Application of a material model based on the Johnson-Cook and Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman model in ship collision and grounding simulations [J], Ocean Engineering205(2) (2020), 106–117.
15.
FangZ., YuH., KeR., et al., Automatic Identification System-Based Approach for Assessing the Near-Miss Collision Risk Dynamics of Ships in Ports [J], IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems5(99) (2018), 54–60.
