MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810234984 · doi:10.1115/1.4040660

A Better Way to Train Personnel to Be Safe in Emergencies

2018· article· en· W2810234984 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Smith, Brian Veitch

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Part B Mechanical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSBMLComputer scienceCompetence (human resources)Context (archaeology)Training (meteorology)SimulationMarkup languageWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offshore petroleum platforms present complex, time-sensitive situations that can make emergency evacuations difficult to manage. Virtual environments (VE) can train safety-critical tasks and help prepare personnel to respond to real-world offshore emergencies. Before industries can adopt VE training, its utility must be established to ensure the technology provides effective training. This paper presents the results of two experiments that investigated the training utility of VE training. The experiments focused particularly on determining the most appropriate method to deliver offshore emergency egress training using a virtual environment. The first experiment used lecture-based teaching (LBT). The second experiment investigated the utility of a simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) pedagogical method from the medical field to address offshore emergency egress training. Both training programs (LBT and SBML) were used to train naïve participants in basic onboard familiarization and emergency evacuation procedures. This paper discusses the training efficacy of the SBML method in this context and compares the results of the SBML experimental study to the results of the LBT training experiment. Efficacy of the training methods is measured by a combination of time spent training and performance achieved by each of the training groups. Results show that the SBML approach to VE training was more time effective and produced better performance in the emergency scenarios. SBML training can help address individual variability in competence. Limitations to the SBML training are discussed and recommendations to improve the delivery of SBML training are presented. Overall, the results indicate that employing SBML training in industry can improve human reliability during emergencies through increased competence and compliance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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