MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2368721831

Discussions on Theoretical Understanding and Effects of Behavior Based Safety

2013· article· en· W2368721831 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shangfei Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueZhongguo anquan kexue xuebao · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSafety and Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)CausationAccident (philosophy)StatisticArgument (complex analysis)Content analysisSet (abstract data type)Risk analysis (engineering)EngineeringPsychologyComputer scienceEpistemologySociologyBusinessPolitical scienceSocial scienceMathematicsLawMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been argument about the theoretical essence,scope,content and effects of applications about BBS,which seriously hindered the scientific research and application of BBS in China and also in other countries.By means of theoretical analysis,literature review,and with the help of one of the modern accident causation models,behavior-based model,built by the authors,the argued issues about BBS were investigated,and it was concluded that behavioral safety is a whole set of theory and methodology for accident prevention,its scope of the content are proximately the same as safety science;the content of BBS involves accident statistic analysis and the resolutions of direct,indirect,radical and root causes of accidents that are in organizational and personal levels respectively.The case studies in Canada and the US have already proved that behavioral safety is a very effective strategy for accident prevention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhongguo anquan kexue xuebaoSame topicSafety and Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207