MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051998892 · doi:10.1080/13669877.2014.919515

Coupling of advanced techniques for dynamic risk management

2014· article· en· W2051998892 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Risk Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk analysis (engineering)Risk assessmentIdentification (biology)Risk managementComputer scienceHazardProcess (computing)InferenceHazard analysisPreparednessBusinessReliability engineeringComputer securityEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification and assessment of hazards and risks in the activities of the process industry are of paramount importance for the prevention of major accidents. Although several techniques of HAZard Identification (HAZID) and quantified risk analysis have often been proved effective in the industry, they generally lack the dynamic dimension of risk management. In other words, they lack the ability to learn from new risk notions, experience and early warnings. When carrying out HAZID and risk assessment, there is the need to know how to deal with atypical accident scenarios as soon as their emergence is demonstrated. The related risk needs to be addressed in an ever-changing environment. In fact, what is not identified or assessed cannot be prevented or mitigated and latent risk is more dangerous than recognized one due to the relative lack of preparedness. This study proposes a dynamic approach to risk by coupling an advanced technique for hazard identification to an innovative method for risk assessment: the Dynamic procedure for atypical scenarios identification (DyPASI) and the Dynamic risk assessment (DRA) method. DyPASI was developed within the EC project iNTeg-Risk. This technique aims to complete and update HAZID. Atypical accident scenarios, which by definition are deviating from normal expectations of unwanted events or worst case reference scenarios, are identified through a systematic screening of related emerging risk notions. The DRA method aims to estimate the updated expected frequency of accident scenarios by means of Bayesian inference. Real time abnormal situations or incident data are used as new information to update the failure probabilities of the system safety barriers, which necessarily affect the overall scenario frequencies and the related risk profile. The BP Texas City refinery accident, that occurred on 23 March 2005, was considered as a case study. The results obtained from the application of the dynamic risk approach show that the accident should have been expected and its occurrence probability could have been reduced through this approach. The results highlight the need of safety culture and decision-making processes capable of dealing dynamically with emerging and increasing risk issues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.402 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it