## 4 Results
### Citation Index of Included Studies
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Study** & **Citations** & **Data Source** & **Nodes** & **Applicability** \\ \hline [PERSON] et al. [47] & 1 & EK, ED & 11 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [48] & 0 & EK & 16 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [49] & 0 & ED & & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [50] & 1 & EK, ED & 14 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [51] & 30 & EK, ED & 5 & Resilience \\ [PERSON] et al. [52] & 32 & EK, ED & 11 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [53] & 1 & EK, ED & 24 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [54] & 48 & EK, ED & 51 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [55] & 4 & ED & 13 & Cyber Impact \\ [PERSON] et al. [56] & 0 & EK, ED & 8 & Root Cause Analysis \\ [PERSON] et al. [57] & 37 & EK, ED & 6 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [58] & 7 & ED & 5 & Intrusion Detection \\ [PERSON] et al. [59] & 30 & ED & 4 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [60] & 8 & ED & 6 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [61] & 4 & ED & 24 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [62] & 0 & EK, ED & 19 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [63] & 0 & EK & 8 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [64] & 10 & ED & & Trust Computation \\ [PERSON] et al. [65] & 25 & ED & 40 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [66] & 16 & EK, ED & 31 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [67] & 7 & ED & 6 & Anomaly Detection \\ [PERSON] et al. [68] & 60 & EK, ED & 53 & Reliability Assessment \\ [PERSON] et al. [69] & 16 & EK & 8 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [70] & 4 & ED & 47 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [71] & 27 & ED & 13 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [72] & 17 & EK & 30 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [73] & 3 & ED & 20 & Assessment \\ [PERSON] et al. [74] & 4 & EK & 12 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [75] & 12 & EK, ED & 8 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [76] & 0 & EK & 24 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [77] & 9 & EK, ED & 8 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [78] & 2 & EK, ED & 6 & Safety Assessment \\ [PERSON] [79] & 6 & EK & 60 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [80] & 4 & EK, ED & 17 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [81] & 1 & ED & 3 & Vulnerability \\ [PERSON] et al. [82] & 76 & ED & 64 & Assessment \\ [PERSON] et al. [83] & 22 & EK & 10 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al[PERSON] [84] & 1 & EK & 5 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [85] & 3 & EK & 47 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [86] & 7 & ED & 4 & Attacks Analysis \\ [PERSON] et al. [87] & 4 & EK & 36 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [88] & 60 & EK & 20 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [89] & 1 & ED & 20 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [90] & 0 & EK, ED & 58 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] et al. [91] & 17 & ED & 14 & Software Verification \\ [PERSON] et al. [92] & 2 & EK & 4 & Risk Management \\ [PERSON] [93] & 0 & ED & 22 & Safety Assessment \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: \(Cont.\)However, the record number of included articles per year is reported in Figure 5, which demonstrates the research trend of applying GT and BN to implement safety and security, based on the included studies. The analysis suggests that scholars have been publishing more articles, addressing united safety and security aspects, in the last two years. From 2019 and 2020, 13 (9 BN, 1 GT, 1 GT, and BN), and 9 (8 BN, 1 BN, and GT) papers are included in this SLR, respectively. [PERSON] Data Sources and Number of Nodes Used to Construct BN/GT  
The BN and GT play a significant role in predicting and unintentionally diagnosing failures and targeted risks by using numerous tools and models, based on the information collected from the system expert's knowledge (EK) and/or from empirical data (ED). EK represents the opinions collected by interviewing the system or domain expert, and ED is the historical or experimental data gathered by real-time scenarios or the literature [50; 51; 52; 53; 54]. It is revealed in existing studies that a reliable strategy can be attained for the developed model by applying collective EK and ED.