Human Error Probability Assessment During Maintenance Activities of Marine Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maintenance operations on-board ships are highly demanding. Maintenance operations are intensive activities requiring high man-machine interactions in challenging and evolving conditions. The evolving conditions are weather conditions, workplace temperature, ship motion, noise and vibration, and workload and stress. For example, extreme weather condition affects seafarers' performance, increasing the chances of error, and, consequently, can cause injuries or fatalities to personnel. An effective human error probability model is required to better manage maintenance on-board ships. The developed model would assist in developing and maintaining effective risk management protocols. Thus, the objective of this study is to develop a human error probability model considering various internal and external factors affecting seafarers' performance. METHODS: The human error probability model is developed using probability theory applied to Bayesian network. The model is tested using the data received through the developed questionnaire survey of >200 experienced seafarers with >5 years of experience. The model developed in this study is used to find out the reliability of human performance on particular maintenance activities. RESULTS: The developed methodology is tested on the maintenance of marine engine's cooling water pump for engine department and anchor windlass for deck department. In the considered case studies, human error probabilities are estimated in various scenarios and the results are compared between the scenarios and the different seafarer categories. The results of the case studies for both departments are also compared. CONCLUSION: The developed model is effective in assessing human error probabilities. These probabilities would get dynamically updated as and when new information is available on changes in either internal (i.e., training, experience, and fatigue) or external (i.e., environmental and operational conditions such as weather conditions, workplace temperature, ship motion, noise and vibration, and workload and stress) factors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".