## 4 Results and Discussion
### Sensitivity Analysis  
Using MCDM requires a sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of using different weights for risk mitigation criteria when selecting risk mitigation measures that ensure the safety and quality of IFM. The details of ten test cases are presented in Table 9 for the sensitivity analysis. The overall results indicate that, despite slight changes in rank, QR.M2 generally appears to be the best mitigation alternative regardless of weight changes. As a result, it is unsurprising that the factors' weights tend to remain relatively stable during the decision-making process. Table 9 presents the results of the sensitivity analysis. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & ER.M4 & ER.M5 & OR.M1 & OR.M3 & QR.M2 & QR.M3 & QR.M4 & QR.M5 & Weights & Ranks \\ \hline ER.M4 & 0.20 & 0.21 & 0.28 & 0.30 & 0.16 & 0.22 & 0.22 & 0.12 & 0.21 & 2 \\ \hline ER.M5 & 0.10 & 0.10 & 0.07 & 0.15 & 0.10 & 0.11 & 0.18 & 0.12 & 0.12 & 4 \\ \hline OR.M1 & 0.10 & 0.21 & 0.14 & 0.15 & 0.16 & 0.11 & 0.13 & 0.16 & 0.14 & 3 \\ \hline OR.M3 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.07 & 0.07 & 0.10 & 0.17 & 0.09 & 0.08 & 0.08 & 5 \\ \hline QR.M2 & 0.40 & 0.31 & 0.28 & 0.22 & 0.31 & 0.28 & 0.22 & 0.28 & 0.29 & 1 \\ \hline QR.M3 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 0.07 & 0.02 & 0.06 & 0.06 & 0.09 & 0.12 & 0.07 & 6 \\ \hline QR.M4 & 0.04 & 0.07 & 0.08 & 0.04 & 0.06 & 0.03 & 0.04 & 0.08 & 0.04 & 7 \\ \hline QR.M5 & 0.07 & 0.03 & 0.03 & 0.04 & 0.04 & 0.02 & 0.02 & 0.04 & 0.04 & 8 \\ \hline Sum & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Weighted normalized matrix of mitigation criteria factors. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Alternative Code** & **Original** & **Test 1** & **Test 2** & **Test 3** & **Test 4** & **Test 5** & **Test 6** & **Test 7** & **Test 8** & **Test 9** & **Test 10** \\ \hline ER.M4 & 2 & 4 & 3 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 & 2 \\ \hline ER.M5 & 4 & 2 & 4 & 3 & 5 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 6 \\ \hline OR.M1 & 3 & 3 & 2 & 4 & 3 & 7 & 5 & 6 & 8 & 3 & 3 \\ \hline OR.M3 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 4 & 5 & 3 & 5 & 5 & 7 & 5 \\ \hline QR.M2 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\ \hline QR.M3 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 6 & 3 & 6 & 6 & 4 \\ \hline QR.M4 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 3 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 5 & 7 \\ \hline QR.M5 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 3 & 8 & 8 \\ \hline \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Ranking Order} & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) & QR.M2 \(>\) \\  & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & OR.M1 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) & ER.M4 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & OR.M1 \(>\) & QR.M1 \(>\) & RR.M4 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & OR.M1 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M5 \(>\) & QR.M1 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & ER.M5 \(>\) & RR.M5 \(>\) & OR.M1 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & OR.M3 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & ER.M5 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & OR.M1 \(>\) & OR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M1 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) & QR.M3 \(>\) & QR.M4 \(>\) \\ \cline{1-1}  & QR.M5 & QR.M6 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 & QR.M1 & QR.M5 & QR.M5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: Sensitivity analysis. According to the correlation between the original ranking and the ten tests conducted, they are highly correlated at 0.836. The outcome of a simple calculation of the frequency repetition of each mitigation alternative shows a stable ranking pattern, with QR.M2 and QR.M5 ranking 1 st and 8 th in all ten tests, respectively. Similarly, ER.M4, QR.M3, and QR.M4 have been ranked 2 nd, 6 th, and 7 th eight times, respectively. The OR.M3 rank repeats seven times, while ER.M5 repeats six times.