MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Integrating safety management systems in hydrogen production facilities

2025· article· en· W4409549675 on OpenAlexaff
He Li, Mohammad Yazdi, Sidum Adumene, Elham Goleiji

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Hydrogen Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie ActionsUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsHydrogen productionProduction (economics)Environmental scienceHydrogen storageHydrogenComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores integrating a comprehensive safety management system into hydrogen production facilities, emphasizing the critical importance of safety given the associated risks, including high pressures, flammability, and potential for leaks. A robust chemical safety management system (CSMS) tool is introduced, which is designed to significantly enhance safety protocols by providing structured frameworks for hazard identification, real-time onitoring, predictive analytics, and regulatory compliance tracking. Quantitative analyses conducted at actual hydrogen facilities demonstrate a 60 % reduction in safety incidents, a 16.7 % improvement in regulatory compliance scores, and a 42.5 % enhancement in operational response efficiency following CSMS implementation. This paper establishes the superiority and critical improvements provided by integrating this advanced CSMS through detailed case studies, real-world applications, and comparative analysis. The results underscore the tangible benefits, including improved incident management, reduced operational risks, and more substantial alignment with national and international safety standards, highlighting the system's essential role in sustainable hydrogen production. • CSMS integration improves safety in hydrogen production facilities. •Enhanced compliance through structured safety management frameworks. •Real-world case studies demonstrate effectiveness of CSMS tools. •Improved operational response and incident prevention strategies. •Emphasis on material integrity ensures safer hydrogen infrastructure.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations20
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Hydrogen EnergySame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207