Risk management with hard-soft data fusion in maritime domain awareness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Enhanced situational awareness is integral to risk management and response evaluation. Dynamic systems that incorporate both hard and soft data sources allow for comprehensive situational frameworks which can supplement physical models with conceptual notions of risk. The processing of widely available semi-structured textual data sources can produce soft information that is readily consumable by such a framework. In this paper, we augment the situational awareness capabilities of a recently proposed risk management framework (RMF) with the incorporation of soft data. We illustrate the beneficial role of the hard-soft data fusion in the characterization and evaluation of potential vessels in distress within Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) scenarios. Risk features pertaining to maritime vessels are defined a priori and then quantified in real time using both hard (e.g., Automatic Identification System, Douglas Sea Scale) as well as soft (e.g., historical records of worldwide maritime incidents) data sources. A risk-aware metric to quantify the effectiveness of the hard-soft fusion process is also proposed. Though illustrated with MDA scenarios, the proposed hard-soft fusion methodology within the RMF can be readily applied to other domains.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".