MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415338861 · doi:10.1016/j.trip.2025.101694

Understanding industry learning behaviours in the context of safety: A railways perspective

2025· article· en· W4415338861 on OpenAlex
Wei-Ting Hong, Geoffrey Clifton, John D. Nelson

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education
KeywordsSafety cultureContext (archaeology)CommitHazardIncentiveRelevance (law)LegislatureStakeholderApprenticeship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Hazard of deterioration in railway safety is explored. • Industry learning behaviours in the safety context are investigated. • Failure to learn across jurisdictions in the rail industry is identified. • Barriers to advancing the safety culture are revealed. • Extending the breadth and depth of railway safety is suggested. From its inception, the railway industry has sought to develop a safety culture where hazards are identified and addressed and all parties commit to improving safety. However, efforts are often fragmented with limited understanding of cross-jurisdictional knowledge sharing, potentially leading to the under-researched hazard of deterioration in railway safety over time. The paper provides an overview of how the industry conducts safety knowledge retrieval, processing, and dissemination, as well as its relevance for learning behaviours and safety culture. The triangulation method is used to examine the learning behaviours of railway industries in the UK, the USA, Canada and Australia by co-reference analysis of railway accident reports, review of literature in other high-reliability organisations (HROs), and outcomes of stakeholder workshops and participant surveys. The results show the significance of a strong safety culture in promoting a safe environment underpinned by rigorous legislative frameworks and incorporating incentives to learn from historical accidents. Furthermore, failure to learn across jurisdictions may result in misapplied investment and misunderstandings in the prioritisation of resources for advancing railway safety. Several barriers to advancing the safety culture that lead to the potential deterioration of the safety culture have been investigated, including a lack of motivation for cross-jurisdiction learning, legislative framework restrictions, struggles in maintaining corporate memory and technological limitations. Another key conclusion is that learning across jurisdictions and over time fosters a proactive safety culture that anticipates and mitigates risks before they result in accidents.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.295 · 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