MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911673122 · doi:10.5267/j.jpm.2018.11.001

Fuzzy inference system-Latin hypercube simulation: An integrated hybrid model for OHS risks management

2019· article· en· W2911673122 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ehsan Haqiqat, Yahia Zare Mehrjerdi, Ali Zare Bidaki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Project Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin hypercube samplingComputer scienceHypercubeFuzzy logicInferenceFuzzy inferenceFuzzy inference systemAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemArtificial intelligenceFuzzy control systemParallel computingMathematicsMonte Carlo method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk management in construction industry in several cases is not only incomplete regarding the unification of Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) hazards, but it is also incomplete in not having a systematic and innovative method to assess the impacts of these risks on the objectives of a project.An integrated hybrid Fuzzy Inference System-Latin Hypercube Simulation for the evaluation of OHS risks in construction projects is presented in this paper.Prioritization of safety risks systematically without human interference with fuzzy inference system gives the appropriate response to the identified risks.An advanced Monte Carlo simulation is also used for the evaluation of quantitative objectives of a project.This approach allows us to get away from discrimination and simulate the risks with high impacts but with low probabilities.In order to measure the relationship between the occurrences of each of the risks impacts on project objectives, the sensitivity analysis based on Pearson correlation coefficient is used to determine the usefulness of the proposed integrated hybrid method.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Project ManagementSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207