MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3190882464 · doi:10.6919/icje.202106_7(6).0009

Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Bayesian Network Application in Safety Field

2021· article· en· W3190882464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fangfang Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Core Journal of Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian networkField (mathematics)Computer scienceData scienceReliability (semiconductor)VisualizationData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bayesian network (BNs) has been widely used in uncertain knowledge modeling since it was proposed, especially in safety assessment and risk prediction. In order to fully understand the application status of Bayesian network in the field of safety, 3111 sample documents were collected from the web of science core collection database. Through CiteSpace technology text mining and visual analysis software, document output, keywords, author cooperation, organization cooperation, citation and journal distribution were analyzed. The results show that: FAISAL KHAN, MOHAMED ABDELATY, HELAI HUANG, TAREK SAYED, JAEYOUNG LEE, etc. published Bayesian networks The most widely used literature in the field of safety has made an important contribution to the development of this field; institutional cooperation is mainly based on Univ Central Florida, MEM Univ Newfoundland, Univ British Columbia, Tongji Univ, Texas A & M Univ, cents Univ, Delft Univ technology and other universities; journal distribution of literature is mainly based on the core functions of Bayesian network, and mainly distributed in ACCIDENT ANALYSIS AND PREVENTION, TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECODE, RELIABILITY ENGINEERING SYSTEM SAFETY and SAFETY SCIENCE.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0250.069
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.328 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Core Journal of EngineeringSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207