MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001868797 · doi:10.1061/ajrua6.0001044

Integration of Resilience and FRAM for Safety Management

2020· article· en· W3001868797 on OpenAlex
Doug Smith, Brian Veitch, Faisal Khan, Rocky Taylor

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems Part A Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk analysis (engineering)Robustness (evolution)Computer scienceResilience (materials science)Process managementSystems engineeringManagement scienceEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resilience is a concept that can be used to bring additional understanding to safety management, to complement traditional approaches. The additional understanding will enable more-informed safety management decisions to be made by operators. This is critical for operations in remote and hash environments. The concepts of resilience, such as robustness and rapidity, can be used to inform safety management decisions. A methodology was presented that uses quantitative techniques of system performance measurement and qualitative understanding of functional execution from the functional resonance analysis method (FRAM) to gain an understanding of these resilience concepts. Examples of robustness and rapidity using this methodology were illustrated, and how they can help operators manage their operation was discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.273
Teacher spread0.250 · 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