Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study was performed with two main goals in mind. The first objective is to identify the existing problems with current systems and the way they handle the criminal proceedings following an aviation accident. The second goal is to study the need for a unified system which could diminish uncertainty and enhance safety with a growth of trust within and in between the industry and the judiciary. Research and studies performed by many esteemed well-recognized personnel involved in the industry, ranging from lawyers to professors as well as aviation professionals were used in this paper. A comparison was also made between the differentiating legal systems, and examples have been used in order to portray the dilemma that the industry is facing. This led to the illustration of the huge gap in the industry and the reasons behind the second aim of this research, that being the need for a unified balanced system in the aftermath of an accident investigation where it is found that criminal proceedings need to be pursued in the light of the revelations made by the accident report. The findings of this study strongly suggest that there exists a gap in the industry of aviation, which, instead of enhancing safety, is standing in the way of the maintenance and the growth of safety of commercial aviation. The many differentiating national legal systems have adopted diverse rules and regulation on matters dealing with aviation (i.e., the investigation process, whether the technical investigation has priority over the judicial one or vice versa, the procedure of collecting and analyzing evidence, voluntary/mandatory reporting systems, anonymity of voluntarily reporting personnel, public disclosure of data and evidence, etc.). In order to be able to tackle these obstacles ICAO needs to play a more proactive role in the unification of laws, rules, and procedures regulating the industry and the procedure used by all involved personnel in the aftermath of an aviation accident or incident. States also need to be more proactive in their adoption of ICAO Standards and Recommended practices rather than simply applying national rules and regulations, which mirror the minimum standards required. In this sense data, evidence, testimonies and identities of voluntary reporters need to be taken more seriously and afforded at a global stage. There is also a need for an international tribunal with a panel of judges who are educated and experienced in the aviation industry, and who are surrounded by the expertise needed for the comprehension of the technical and complex issues, which arise from criminal proceedings in the aftermath of an aviation catastrophe. This could help the determination of what kind of acts or omissions qualify for criminal prosecution, as well as the protection of classified and sensitive information from being leaked to the public and the media. It could also prove to be less prejudicial and more just creating a safe environment for reporters of errors and mistakes as political, social, and media pressure will not interfere in the investigation or the proceedings before the aforementioned tribunal.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».