Safety Risk Analysis of Unmanned Ships in Inland Rivers Based on a Fuzzy Bayesian Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Risk factor identification is the basis for risk assessment. To quantify the safety risks of unmanned vessels in inland rivers, through analysis of previous studies, the safety risk impact factor framework of unmanned vessels in inland rivers is established based on three aspects: the ship aspect, the environmental aspect, and the management and control aspect. Relying on Yangtze River, a fuzzy Bayesian network of the sailing safety risk of unmanned ships in inland rivers is constructed. The proposed safety risk model has considered different operational and environmental factors that affect shipping operations. Based on the fuzzy set theory, historical data, and expert judgments and on previous works are used to estimate the base value (prior values) of various risk factors. The case study assessed the safety risk probabilities of unmanned vessels in Yangtze River. By running uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of the model, a significant change in the likelihood of the occurrence of safety risk is identified, and suggests a dominant factor in risk causation. The research results can provide effective information for analyzing the current safety status for navigation systems of unmanned ships in inland rivers. The estimated safety risk provides early warning to take appropriate preventive and mitigative measures to enhance the overall safety of shipping operations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".