MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W32498243 · doi:10.3390/ijms21113985

A Study on Design of S-BSC(Safety-Balanced ScoreCard) for Total Safety Evaluation

2008· article· en· W32498243 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kwangmo Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Korea Safety Management and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTechnology and Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBalanced scorecardMaximizationAnalytic hierarchy processRisk analysis (engineering)HazardOperations managementComputer scienceProcess managementBusinessEngineeringOperations researchMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk is the probability of an adverse event given exposure to hazard. There are many reason for unsafety situation without safety operation. The reason is no safety evaluation system in small enterprise. And then this study purposes safety management activities that is evaluation system for total safety efficiency's maximization. Therefore, in this study, this model that can evaluate quantitative activities in small enterprise that maximize safety efficiency wishes to do design using balanced scorecard. In other words, this study aims to suggest a performance measurement model reflecting the characteristics of safety evaluation system, especially the model for return manufacturing related to safety, and to develop the S-BSC(Safety-Balanced ScoreCard) measurement model using a weight lifetime value to which a relative weight is applied by using AHP based on the BSC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.241 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Korea Safety Management and ScienceSame topicTechnology and Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207