Analysis of maritime transport accidents using Bayesian networks
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Bayesian network–based risk analysis approach is proposed to analyse the risk factors influencing maritime transport accidents. Comparing with previous studies in the relevant literature, it reveals new features including (1) new primary data directly derived from maritime accident records by two major databanks Marine Accident Investigation Branch and Transportation Safety Board of Canada from 2012 to 2017, (2) rational classification of the factors with respect to each of the major types of maritime accidents for effective prevention, and (3) quantification of the extent to which different combinations of the factors influence each accident type. The network modelling the interdependency among the risk factors is constructed by using a naïve Bayesian network and validated by sensitivity analysis. The results reveal that the common risk factors among different types of accidents are ship operation, voyage segment, ship type, gross tonnage, hull type, and information. Scenario analysis is conducted to predict the occurrence likelihood of different types of accidents under various situations. The findings provide transport authorities and ship owners with useful insights for maritime accident prevention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it