Leading Safety Indicators: Application of Machine Learning for Safety Performance Measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leading Safety Indicators: Application of Machine Learning for Safety Performance Measurement Parinaz Jafari, Emad Mohamed, Estacio Pereira, Shih-Chung Kang and Simaan Abourizk Pages 501-506 (2019 Proceedings of the 36th ISARC, Banff, Canada, ISBN 978-952-69524-0-6, ISSN 2413-5844) Abstract: Proactive approaches designed to prevent incidents before they occur are essential for achieving effective safety management. Emerging as an important component of proactive safety management, leading indicators are used to assess and control safety performance. With the aim of reducing the number or severity of worksite accidents, methods capable of predicting future safety performance using leading safety indicators have been developed. However, these methods have been developed for a specific set of leading indicators. This has substantially limited their application in practice, as leading indicators with the greatest impact on safety performance vary considerably between organizations and projects. An approach for predicting accident occurrence on construction sites that can be applied to any combination of leading indicators is proposed to address these limitations. Data used to develop the proposed approach were collected by a construction company from eight construction projects over a period of two years. Feature selection techniques were used to filter the original factors into the most critical subset, which were then used as inputs. Various supervised learning algorithms, namely support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression, and random forest, were then tested to determine which algorithm(s) yielded the highest prediction accuracy. The results demonstrate that the proposed procedure can be used for early recognition of potentially hazardous project characteristics and site conditions regardless of the number or type of leading indicators available within an organization. Research in this area is expected to facilitate the implementation of targeted safety management controls and to improve safety performance. Keywords: Safety Leading Indicators; Safety Management; Safety Performance; Machine Learning DOI: https://doi.org/10.22260/ISARC2019/0067 Download fulltext Download BibTex Download Endnote (RIS) TeX Import to Mendeley
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".