Risk assessment of safety-critical software relies heavily on expert reviews prone to high epistemic uncertainty and conflicting judgments. While evidence theory is widely used for information fusion, classical rules often yield counter-intuitive results in high-conflict scenarios. To address this, we propose an uncertainty-driven risk evaluation model based on a dual-dimensional evidence fusion approach. The framework integrates an improved Belief Entropy (BE) and an Evidence Conflict Coefficient (ECC) to quantify reliability from two perspectives: (1) Internal Dimension, using BE to measure inherent uncertainty within individual judgments; and (2) External Dimension, using ECC to measure divergence among multiple sources. By adaptively modifying Basic Probability Assignments (BPAs) with these dual-dimensional weights, the model effectively harmonizes data prior to fusion. Validated through an avionics software airworthiness case study, the methodology significantly enhances fusion stability and accuracy. Results confirm it effectively suppresses extreme deviations and raises the performance floor, providing a robust decision-support tool for safety-critical engineering.
Xie et al. (Wed,) studied this question.