Integrated inherent safety index (I2SI): A tool for inherent safety evaluation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inherent safety is a proactive approach for loss prevention and risk management. Considering the lifetime costs of a process and its operation, an inherent safety approach can lead to a cost‐optimal option. Inherent safety may be achieved at any stage of process design; however, its application at the early stages of process design yields the best results. Despite being an attractive and cost‐effective approach, the inherent safety methodology is not widely used. Many reasons have been attributed to this lack of widespread use; the nonavailability of systematic tools for the application of inherent safety principles is perhaps the most important reason. This paper presents a conceptual framework of an integrated inherent safety index (I2SI). It is called an integrated index because the procedure, when fully developed, is intended to consider the life cycle of the process with economic evaluation and hazard potential identification for each option. The I2SI is composed of subindices which account for hazard potential, inherent safety potential, and add‐on control requirements. An application of the I2SI is also discussed. © 2004 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog 23: 136–148, 2004
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it