Safety Barrier Performance Evaluation Method and System for Ship Human Factor Risk Control

Abstract

The present invention provides a safety barrier performance evaluation method and system for ship human factor risk control. The method includes: sorting out ship operation instruction documents and operation safety management system documents, abstracting the interaction relationships between crew members and between crew members and the operation environment in the form of multi-agent, establishing a multi-agent interaction network to present the action path and mechanism of the safety barrier; quantifying the local performance of the safety barrier based on historical data and Monte Carlo simulation; establishing a risk flow model to quantify the global performance of the safety barrier; proposing key performance evaluation indicators for the safety barrier and optimizing its setting scheme based on the evaluation results. The present invention innovatively uses a multi-agent framework to consider the action mechanism among the safety barrier, work process and risk factors, globally quantifies the performance of the safety barrier, solves the technical problem of strong subjectivity of existing related evaluation methods, makes the evaluation process and results of the safety barrier closer to the actual operation scenario, and has practical application value.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of ship safety risk prevention and control effectiveness evaluation, and particularly to a safety barrier performance evaluation method and system for ship human factor risk control. Background Art

[0002] A safety barrier refers to a measure with a clear purpose established to prevent the occurrence of hazards or mitigate the impact of harmful events. In recent years, as an important method in the field of risk prevention and control, safety barrier technology has been widely applied in offshore oil and gas engineering, fire prevention and control, nuclear power, sea / land transportation, etc. However, the current research objects mainly focus on electrical / electronic / programmable electronic related safety systems, and there are few research works on safety barrier technology for human factor risk control.

[0003] As the main body of ship operation, seafarers play a dominant role in ship navigation safety. Unsafe behaviors of seafarers may lead to serious consequences. With the increasing complexity of ship systems and the deeper interaction between seafarers and equipment, traditional methods are difficult to perform safety analysis work, and it is necessary to implement risk control on seafarers' unsafe behaviors and states from the perspective of safety barriers.

[0004] The current safety barrier performance evaluation methods mainly focus on qualitative analysis and local quantitative evaluation. Qualitative analysis will cause problems such as the safety barrier setting scheme being easily interfered by subjectivity and lacking accuracy, while the local quantitative evaluation method will ignore the coupling effect between the barrier and the work process as well as risk factors, and lack a systematic understanding of the causes, evolution, and disaster-causing paths of risks, directly affecting the objectivity of safety barrier performance evaluation and the effectiveness of the setting scheme. Summary of the Invention

[0005] Aiming at the defects existing in the prior art, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a safety barrier performance evaluation method and system for ship human factor risk control to achieve precise control of ship human factor risks.

[0006] To this end, the present invention provides the following technical solutions:

[0007] On the one hand, the present invention provides a safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control, comprising the following steps:

[0008] Based on the operation instruction documents of specific ship areas, the ship operation safety management system documents, and the on-board operation process, establish a multi-agent interaction network, where the multi-agent is the information perception and interaction relationship between seafarers and seafarers, and between seafarers and the operation environment;

[0009] According to the multi-agent interaction network, the safety barriers are divided based on whether the parent nodes of the nodes where the safety barriers are located are safe behaviors and states. Among them, the safety barriers with parent nodes being safe behaviors and states are the first type of preventive barriers, and the safety barriers with parent nodes being unsafe behaviors and states are the second type of preventive barriers.

[0010] Use the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barriers and the second type of preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process.

[0011] Use Monte Carlo simulation to quantify the probabilities of the second type of preventive barriers being effective or ineffective after being triggered, so as to realize the local performance evaluation of the safety barriers.

[0012] Taking the probabilities of the first type of preventive barriers and the second type of preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process, and the probabilities of the second type of preventive barriers being effective or ineffective after being triggered as inputs, establish a risk flow model, and calculate the probabilities of the task being ultimately successful and failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme, so as to realize the global performance evaluation of the safety barriers.

[0013] Furthermore, it also includes:

[0014] Determine the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barriers according to the local performance evaluation results of the safety barriers and the global performance evaluation results of the safety barriers.

[0015] Calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barriers, based on the importance and the sensitivity;

[0016] Based on the importance and the sensitivity, draw a barrier management matrix, and combine with the actual engineering situation to adjust the barrier setting scheme.

[0017] Furthermore, adjusting the barrier setting scheme includes:

[0018] Compare the evaluation results of the key performance indicators of the safety barriers before and after the scheme adjustment. If the evaluation results are optimized, it indicates that the adjustment measures are effective;

[0019] Otherwise, modify the barrier setting scheme until the evaluation results of the key performance indicators of the safety barriers can be accepted.

[0020] Furthermore, the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barriers include:

[0021] The probability \(P\) of the first type of preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process t 1 ;

[0022] The probability \(P\) of the second type of preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process t 2 ;

[0023] The probability that the second type of preventive barrier is effective after being triggered

[0024] The probability that the second type of preventive barrier fails after being triggered

[0025] The probability P of the ultimate success of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme succ ;

[0026] The probability P of the ultimate failure of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme fl ;

[0027] The degree of combination P between the barrier and the work process tig , where the degree of combination between the barrier and the work process represents the contribution to the task completion when at least one barrier participates in the operation, and the calculation method is P tig :

[0028]

[0029] In the formula, P fl * is the probability of task completion without setting a barrier

[0030] Furthermore, a multi-agent interaction network is established, including: based on the operation guidance document for a specific area of the ship and the ship operation safety management system document, performing task analysis, safety analysis, and process analysis, extracting nodes based on the results of task analysis and safety analysis, and extracting directed edges based on the results of process analysis to obtain a multi-agent interaction network

[0031] Furthermore, the task analysis includes work process and crew category

[0032] The safety analysis includes safety barriers, unsafe behaviors / conditions, safety states, and accident types

[0033] The process analysis includes interaction functions, interaction conditions, and interaction processes

[0034] Furthermore, the historical database includes the ship enterprise historical operation database and accident reports

[0035] Furthermore, before using the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation, it also includes

[0036] Determining all possible combinations of working conditions according to the order and possible results of crew members performing tasks in the multi-agent interaction network

[0037] Determine the interaction process of the agents after the safety barrier is triggered according to the described operating conditions combination; use the Monte Carlo simulation method to simulate the interaction process of the agents after the safety barrier is triggered.

[0038] Further, the risk flow model is specifically as follows:

[0039]

[0040] In the formula, assume that there are n nodes in the multi-agent interaction network, λ = (γ ij ) 1×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n, and the vector element γ ij is the probability value of all nodes in the multi-agent interaction network. This vector is unknown and needs to be solved. When the corresponding node is an accident type, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability P fl of the ultimate failure of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme. When the corresponding node is the sink node of the work process, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability P succ of the ultimate success of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme; the matrix C = (c ij ) n×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n, and the element c ij represents the conditional probability from the node v i to v i in the multi-agent interaction network, which can be obtained by statistical analysis of the historical database or Monte Carlo simulation; the matrix W is a diagonal matrix constructed by the sum of the row vector elements of the matrix C; the matrix H is a diagonal matrix of size n×n.

[0041] On the other hand, the present invention also provides a safety barrier performance evaluation system for ship human factor risk control, and the system includes:

[0042] A multi-agent interaction network structure characterization unit, which is used to establish a multi-agent interaction network based on the operation guidance documents of specific ship areas, the ship operation safety management system documents, and the on-board operation process. The multi-agents are the information perception and interaction relationships between crew members and between crew members and the operation environment;

[0043] The local performance evaluation unit of the safety barrier is used to quantify the local performance of the safety barrier, including: dividing the safety barrier according to the multi-agent interaction network based on whether the parent node of the node where the safety barrier is located is a safe behavior and state; among them, the safety barrier with the parent node being a safe behavior and state is the first type of preventive barrier, and the safety barrier with the parent node being an unsafe behavior and state is the second type of preventive barrier; using the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process; using Monte Carlo simulation to quantify the probabilities of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered.

[0044] The global performance evaluation unit of the safety barrier is used to quantify the global performance of the safety barrier, including: taking the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process, and the probabilities of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered as inputs, establishing a risk flow model, and calculating the probabilities of the task being ultimately successful and failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme.

[0045] The performance guarantee standard establishment unit is used to determine the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier according to the local performance evaluation result and the global performance evaluation result of the safety barrier; calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier, based on the importance and the sensitivity; based on the importance and the sensitivity, draw a barrier management matrix, and combine the actual engineering situation to adjust the barrier setting scheme.

[0046] The above technical solution has the following beneficial effects:

[0047] The safety barrier evaluation method for ship human factor risk control provided by the present invention can obtain the action path and coupling mechanism of the safety barrier, quantify and evaluate the local and global performance of the safety barrier, optimize the setting scheme of the safety barrier, and greatly improve the objectivity of the safety barrier performance evaluation and the effectiveness of the setting scheme. More specifically:

[0048] In terms of the objectivity of the safety barrier performance evaluation:

[0049] The present invention adopts a multi-agent framework to consider the interaction mechanism among the safety barrier, the work process and the risk factors, establishes a multi-agent interaction network, presents the action path of the safety barrier, clarifies the coupling mechanism of the safety barrier, closely combines with the actual engineering, and the obtained conclusions are more reliable.

[0050] The present invention respectively establishes corresponding quantitative models for the two core problems of the local evaluation and the global evaluation involved in the safety barrier performance evaluation. Specifically:

[0051] (1) Local performance evaluation of safety barriers: By statistically analyzing historical data and simulating the interaction process of agents after the barrier is triggered using Monte Carlo method, the probability of the safety barrier being triggered during the operation and the probability of being effective / failing after being triggered are quantified.

[0052] (2) Global performance evaluation of safety barriers: Establish a risk flow evaluation model to calculate the probability of the task being ultimately successful / failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme, and systematically evaluate the contribution degree of the safety barrier to the task completion from a global perspective.

[0053] In terms of the effectiveness of the safety barrier setting scheme:

[0054] According to the local and global evaluation results of safety evaluation, the present invention sets key performance evaluation indicators for safety barriers, and compares the effectiveness of the safety barrier setting scheme before and after adjustment based on the evaluation results. Specifically:

[0055] (1) Propose key performance evaluation indicators for safety barriers;

[0056] (2) According to the key performance evaluation indicators of safety barriers and the actual engineering situation, optimize the barrier setting scheme, compare the safety barrier performance evaluation results before and after the adjustment scheme, and measure the effectiveness of the new safety barrier setting scheme. If the result is unacceptable, modify the barrier setting scheme until the evaluation result of the key performance indicators of the safety barrier is acceptable. Description of the Drawings

[0057] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention or the prior art, the following will briefly introduce the drawings required for use in the description of the embodiments or the prior art. Obviously, the following drawings are some embodiments of the present invention. For those of ordinary skill in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative efforts.

[0058] Figure 1 It is a schematic flow chart of the safety barrier performance evaluation method in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0059] Figure 2 It is a schematic diagram of the multi-agent interaction network between the captain and the first mate in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0060] Figure 3 It is a schematic diagram of the multi-agent interaction network between the first mate and the windlass operator in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0061] Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of the multi-agent interaction network between the windlass operator and the mooring equipment in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0062] Figure 5 It is a schematic diagram of the combination of working conditions for anchoring operation in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0063] Figure 6 This is the barrier management matrix drawn according to the calculated barrier importance and sensitivity in the embodiments of the present invention;

[0064] Figure 7 This is the structural block diagram of the safety barrier performance evaluation system in the embodiments of the present invention. Detailed implementation manners

[0065] In order to enable those skilled in the art to better understand the solution of the present invention, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, rather than all the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those of ordinary skill in the art without creative efforts shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0066] It should be noted that the terms "first", "second", etc. in the specification and claims of the present invention and the above-mentioned drawings are used to distinguish similar objects, and do not necessarily need to be used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that such used data can be interchanged under appropriate circumstances so that the embodiments of the present invention described here can be implemented in an order different from those illustrated or described here. In addition, the terms "including" and "having" and any variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion. For example, a process, method, system, product or device including a series of steps or units does not necessarily need to be limited to those steps or units clearly listed, but may include other steps or units not clearly listed or inherent to these process, method, product or device.

[0067] The present invention is directed to the risk control of human factors in ships and proposes a method for evaluating the performance of safety barriers. Specifically, the present invention abstracts the on-board operation process as the interaction of multiple agents, depicts the multi-agent interaction network, and presents the action path and mechanism of the safety barrier; based on this, historical databases are used to statistically analyze operation data and failure data, and Monte Carlo simulation is used to simulate the interaction process of agents after the barrier is triggered, so as to quantitatively evaluate the performance of the safety barrier from a local perspective; a risk flow model is established to evaluate the contribution degree of the safety barrier to the current task system from a global perspective; combined with the local and global evaluation results of the safety barrier, key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier are set, which are used as the optimization basis for the safety barrier setting scheme. The advantages of the safety barrier evaluation method and system proposed by the present invention are that they are directed to the risk control of crew's unsafe behaviors and states, closely combine with the on-board work process and operation risk factors, conform to engineering practice, present the action mechanism of the safety barrier based on a multi-agent framework, systematically evaluate the performance of the safety barrier from a global perspective, maximize the elimination of the uncertainty brought by qualitative analysis in the existing safety barrier evaluation technology, and effectively improve the objectivity of the safety barrier performance evaluation and the effectiveness of the setting scheme.

[0068] Taking the performance evaluation of relevant safety barriers in the interaction process of the captain, first mate, and windlass operator during the anchoring stage of the anchoring operation as an example, the safety barrier performance evaluation method includes Monte Carlo simulation and a risk flow model. See Figure 1 A safety barrier performance evaluation method for human factor risk control in ships according to an embodiment of the present invention, the method specifically includes the following steps:

[0069] S1. Abstractly describe the information perception and interaction relationship between the captain, first mate, windlass operator and the anchoring operation environment in the form of multiple agents. By comprehensively sorting out the operation guidance documents and ship operation safety management system documents in the ship's bridge area and anchoring area, conduct task analysis, safety analysis and process analysis. Extract nodes based on the results of task analysis and safety analysis, and extract directed edges based on the results of process analysis to establish a multi-agent interaction network between the captain and the first mate. See Figure 2 Establish a multi-agent interaction network between the first mate and the windlass operator. See Figure 3 Establish a multi-agent interaction network between the windlass operator and the anchoring equipment. See Figure 4 .

[0070] Among them, the content of the comprehensive task analysis specifically includes: work process, crew category; the content of the safety analysis specifically includes: safety barrier, unsafe behavior / state, safety state, accident type; the content of the process analysis specifically includes: interaction function, interaction condition, interaction process; the types of nodes in the multi-agent interaction network specifically include: work process, crew category, safety barrier, unsafe behavior / state, safety state, accident type, and the judgment basis for the start and end directions of the directed edges in the multi-agent interaction network specifically includes: interaction function, interaction condition, interaction process.

[0071] S2. Based on the multi-agent interaction network obtained in S1, the safety barriers are divided into the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier according to whether the parent node of the node where the safety barrier is located is a safe behavior / state. Among them, the safety barrier whose parent node is a safe behavior / state is the first type of preventive barrier, which is used to improve the reliability of the work process. The safety barrier whose parent node is an unsafe behavior / state is the second type of preventive barrier, which is used to correct unsafe behaviors and states in order to eliminate risk factors and return to the normal work process. The historical database is used to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process, and Monte Carlo simulation is used to quantify the probabilities of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered, so as to realize the local performance evaluation of the safety barrier.

[0072] Among them, the historical database includes the historical operation database of the ship enterprise and the anchoring accident report. The probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process refer to Figure 2 Figure 3 and Figure 4 the numerical values marked on the directed edge. The *-marked part is the interaction process of the agent after the barrier is triggered, and its probability value is obtained through Monte Carlo simulation. The specific steps include:

[0073] S201: According to the order of tasks executed and possible results in the multi-agent interaction network, it is determined that there are a total of 6 working condition combinations, as shown in Figure 5 and specifically include:

[0074] Working condition 1: Unable to establish communication with the chief mate, and the anchoring task fails.

[0075] Working condition 2: The chief mate receives an incorrect message, resulting in the winch operator receiving an incorrect message. If the captain discovers and corrects it in time, it may succeed, enabling the winch operator to receive the correct message; otherwise, the anchoring task fails.

[0076] Working condition 3: The chief mate receives an incorrect message, resulting in the winch operator receiving an incorrect message. Either execute the incorrect instruction and the anchoring task fails; or be corrected by the captain in time and execute the correct instruction.

[0077] Working condition 4: The chief officer receives the correct message, and the windlass operator receives the correct instruction and executes the instruction.

[0078] Working condition 5: The chief officer receives the correct message, but the windlass operator does not receive the message. If the captain discovers this, the correct instruction will be executed; otherwise, the task fails.

[0079] Working condition 6: The chief officer receives the correct message, but the windlass operator receives an incorrect message. Either the incorrect instruction is executed and the anchoring task fails, or the captain and the chief officer correct it in time and the correct instruction is executed.

[0080] S202: Use the Monte Carlo simulation method to simulate the interaction process of agents after the barrier is triggered.

[0081] Set the total execution time of the task as T. If the task is not completed within 2T, it is considered that the anchoring fails. To avoid task failure, in working condition 2 and working condition 5, problems must be discovered and corrected in time; in working condition 3 and working condition 6, problems must be discovered and corrected within a certain period at the beginning of the task; in working condition 4, problems must be discovered and corrected before the dangerous situation occurs. Therefore, in this embodiment, the truly interactive parts of multiple agents include three parts, specifically including:

[0082] ① Discover that the windlass operator does not execute the instruction through the monitoring system at least within T. Assume that checking the monitoring system and discovering unsafe behaviors are independent events, and the barrier takes effect when they occur simultaneously. Assume that the behavior of checking the monitoring conforms to a Poisson distribution process, and the number of checks within T conforms to a Poisson distribution:

[0083]

[0084] The probability of discovering and correcting the problem is: 1 - (1 - P1) λt

[0085] ② Discover the incorrect operation of the windlass operator through the monitoring system within a certain ΔT within [0, T].

[0086] The probability of discovering and correcting the problem is: Δt = 2, P2 = 0.8

[0087] ③ Discover the problem of the windlass operator's protective standing position through the monitoring system before a certain t0 within [0, T] before [0, t0]. If t0 is a random variable, the probability of discovering and correcting the problem is: N(μt0, σ); if t0 is a constant, the calculation method of the probability of discovering and correcting the problem is the same as that in ②.

[0088] S3. Based on the probabilities of the first - type preventive barriers and the second - type preventive barriers being triggered during the operation determined in S2, as well as the probabilities of the second - type preventive barriers being effective or ineffective after being triggered, using these as inputs, establish a risk - flow model, calculate the probability of the task being ultimately successful / failed under the current safety - barrier setting scheme, so as to achieve the global performance evaluation of the safety barriers.

[0089] Among them, the risk - flow model is specifically as follows:

[0090]

[0091] In the formula, assume that there are n nodes in the multi - agent interaction network, λ=(γ ij ) 1×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n. The vector element γ ij is the probability value of all nodes in the multi - agent interaction network. This vector is unknown and needs to be solved. When the corresponding node is of the accident type, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability of the task being ultimately failed P fl under the current safety - barrier setting scheme. When the corresponding node is the sink node of the work process, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability of the task being ultimately successful P succ under the current safety - barrier setting scheme; the matrix C=(c ij ) n×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n. The element c ij represents the conditional probability from the node v i to v i in the multi - agent interaction network, which can be obtained by statistical analysis of the historical database or Monte Carlo simulation; the matrix W is a diagonal matrix constructed by the sum of the row - vector elements of the matrix C, specifically:

[0092]

[0093] The matrix H is a diagonal matrix of size n×n. Among them, the elements on the diagonal of the row or column where the sink node is located are - 1, and the others are 0, which is expressed as:

[0094]

[0095] S4: Based on the local performance evaluation results of the safety barrier determined in S2 and the global performance evaluation results of the safety barrier determined in S3, propose the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier, calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier, draw a barrier management matrix based on the importance and sensitivity, combine the actual engineering situation, adjust the barrier setting scheme, compare the evaluation results of the key performance indicators of the safety barrier before and after the scheme adjustment. If the evaluation results are optimized, it indicates that the adjustment measures are effective; otherwise, modify the barrier setting scheme until the evaluation results of the key performance indicators of the safety barrier are acceptable.

[0096] Among them, the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier are specifically:

[0097] The probability P that the first type of preventive barrier is triggered during the operation t 1 ;

[0098] The probability P that the second type of preventive barrier is triggered during the operation t 2 ;

[0099] The probability that the second type of preventive barrier is effective after being triggered

[0100] The probability that the second type of preventive barrier fails after being triggered

[0101] The probability P that the task is finally successful under the current safety barrier setting scheme succ ;

[0102] The probability P that the task is finally failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme fl ;

[0103] The degree of combination P between the barrier and the work process, the degree of combination between the barrier and the work process represents the contribution to the task completion when at least one barrier participates in the operation, and the calculation method is P tig , where P tig :

[0104]

[0105] In the formula, P fl * is the probability of task completion when no barrier is set.

[0106] The barrier importance is specifically the evaluation value of the key performance evaluation indicator of the safety barrier, indicating the importance of the barrier to the studied system. Among them, P t 1 , P t 2 , P succand P tig The greater the importance values of indicators such as and P fl are, the more effective the safety barrier setting scheme is, and the smaller the

[0107] Barrier sensitivity indicates the difficulty of optimizing the studied system by adjusting the barrier. Specifically, the evaluation value of the key performance evaluation index of the safety barrier is calculated as follows: the probability that the barrier is effective after being triggered is discretized into a random variable with a step size of 0.001, and the range of change is [0,1]. The standard deviation of the importance of the key performance evaluation index of the safety barrier to be studied is calculated.

[0108] Taking the safety barrier performance evaluation index P succ as an example, the calculated importance and sensitivity are shown in Table 1. Sort the nodes in Table 1 in ascending order of importance, use importance as the abscissa and sensitivity as the ordinate to draw the safety barrier management matrix, see Figure 6 . From Figure 6 , it can be seen that although the importance values of the three barriers of "closed-loop communication between the chief mate and the winchman", "closed-loop communication between the captain and the chief mate", and "the captain and the chief mate check the communication equipment in advance" are very high, the sensitivity values are very low, indicating that in the current management system, for the safety barrier performance evaluation index P succ , the effect of optimizing the overall barrier setting scheme by regulating these three barriers is not obvious. In addition, the importance and sensitivity of the two barriers of "the chief mate and the winchman maintain a safe standing position with protection" and "the chief mate receives a wrong instruction and is discovered and corrected by the captain" are relatively high. Therefore, when optimizing the barrier setting scheme, they should be listed as key control objects.

[0109] Table 1

[0110]

[0111] The safety barrier evaluation method for ship human factor risk control provided by the present invention can obtain the action path and coupling mechanism of the safety barrier, obtain the accurate probability that the barrier is triggered during the operation, the probability that the barrier is effective and fails after being triggered, the probability that the task is finally successful and fails under the current safety barrier setting scheme, and the degree of combination between the barrier and the work process, so as to optimize the safety barrier setting scheme and greatly improve the objectivity of safety barrier performance evaluation and the effectiveness of the setting scheme.

[0112] Corresponding to the safety barrier evaluation method for ship human factor risk control in the above embodiment, the present invention also provides a safety barrier evaluation system for ship human factor risk control in an embodiment of the present invention. The safety barrier evaluation system includes the mechanism presentation of the safety barrier, the local evaluation of the safety barrier, the global evaluation of the safety barrier, the safety barrier, see Figure 7, a safety barrier performance evaluation system for ship human - factor risk control in the embodiments of the present invention, which specifically includes:

[0113] A multi - agent interaction network structure characterization unit 601, configured to establish a multi - agent interaction network based on the operation guidance documents of specific ship areas, the ship operation safety management system documents, and the on - ship operation process. The multi - agents are the information perception and interaction relationships between crew members and between crew members and the operation environment;

[0114] Among them, the multi - agent interaction network can identify safety barriers and the causal relationships between safety barriers and work processes, crew categories, unsafe behaviors, unsafe states, safety states, and accident types, present the action paths of safety barriers, and reveal the action mechanisms of safety barriers.

[0115] A safety barrier local performance evaluation unit 602, configured to quantify the local performance of safety barriers, including: dividing safety barriers according to the multi - agent interaction network based on whether the parent nodes of the nodes where the safety barriers are located are safety behaviors and states; among them, safety barriers with parent nodes being safety behaviors and states are the first - type preventive barriers, and safety barriers with parent nodes being unsafe behaviors and states are the second - type preventive barriers; using the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first - type preventive barriers and the second - type preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process; using Monte Carlo simulation to quantify the probabilities of the second - type preventive barriers being effective or ineffective after being triggered;

[0116] A safety barrier global performance evaluation unit 603, configured to quantify the global performance of safety barriers, including: taking the probabilities of the first - type preventive barriers and the second - type preventive barriers being triggered during the operation process, and the probabilities of the second - type preventive barriers being effective or ineffective after being triggered as inputs, establishing a risk flow model, and calculating the probabilities of the task being ultimately successful and failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme.

[0117] A performance guarantee standard establishment unit 604, configured to determine the key performance evaluation indicators of safety barriers according to the local performance evaluation results and the global performance evaluation results of safety barriers; calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of safety barriers, and based on the importance and sensitivity, draw a barrier management matrix, and adjust the barrier setting scheme in combination with the actual engineering situation.

[0118] For the safety barrier performance evaluation system in the embodiments of the present invention, since it corresponds to the safety barrier performance evaluation method in the above - mentioned embodiments, the description is relatively simple. For relevant similarities, please refer to the description of the safety barrier performance evaluation method part in the above - mentioned embodiments, and details are not described here.

[0119] The safety barrier evaluation system for ship human factor risk control provided by the present invention can obtain the action path and coupling mechanism of the safety barrier, and obtain the accurate probability of the barrier being triggered during the operation, the probability of the barrier being effective / failed after being triggered, the probability of the task being ultimately successful / failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme, and the degree of combination between the barrier and the work process, so as to optimize the safety barrier setting scheme and greatly improve the objectivity of the safety barrier performance evaluation and the effectiveness of the setting scheme.

[0120] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, rather than to limit them; although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those of ordinary skill in the art should understand that they can still modify the technical solutions recorded in the foregoing embodiments, or perform equivalent replacements on some or all of the technical features; and these modifications or replacements do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control, characterized in that, It includes the following steps: Based on the operation guidance documents for specific areas of the ship, the ship operation safety management system documents, and the on-board operation process, establish a multi-agent interaction network, where the multi-agent is the information perception and interaction relationship between crew members and between crew members and the operation environment; According to the multi-agent interaction network, divide the safety barriers based on whether the parent node of the node where the safety barrier is located is a safe behavior and state; among them, the safety barrier with the parent node being a safe behavior and state is the first type of preventive barrier, and the safety barrier with the parent node being an unsafe behavior and state is the second type of preventive barrier; Use the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process; Use Monte Carlo simulation to quantify the probability of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered, so as to achieve the local performance evaluation of the safety barrier; Taking the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process, and the probability of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered as inputs, establish a risk flow model, and calculate the probabilities of the task being ultimately successful and failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme, so as to achieve the global performance evaluation of the safety barrier.

2. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 1, characterized in that, It also includes: According to the local performance evaluation result of the safety barrier and the global performance evaluation result of the safety barrier, determine the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier; Calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier, based on the importance and the sensitivity; Based on the importance and the sensitivity, draw a barrier management matrix, and in combination with the actual engineering situation, adjust the barrier setting scheme.

3. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 2, characterized in that, Adjusting the barrier setting scheme includes: Compare the key performance index evaluation results of the safety barrier before and after the scheme adjustment. If the evaluation result is optimized, it indicates that the adjustment measure is effective; Otherwise, modify the barrier setting scheme until the key performance index evaluation result of the safety barrier can be accepted.

4. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 2, characterized in that, The key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barrier include: The probability P that the first type of preventive barrier is triggered during the operation t 1 ; The probability P that the second type of preventive barrier is triggered during the operation t 2 ; Probability of effectiveness after the second type of preventive barrier is triggered The probability of failure after the second type of preventive barrier is triggered The probability P of the ultimate success of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme succ ; The probability P of the ultimate failure of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme fl ; Combination degree P of the barrier and the work process tig , the combination degree of the barrier and the work process represents the contribution to task completion when at least one barrier participates in the operation, and the calculation method is P tig :[[]]END]] Where P fl * is the probability of task completion without setting up a barrier.

5. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 1, characterized in that, Establishing a multi-agent interaction network includes: based on the operation guidance documents for specific areas of the ship and the ship operation safety management system documents, conduct task analysis, safety analysis, and process analysis, extract nodes based on the task analysis and safety analysis results, and extract directed edges based on the process analysis results to obtain a multi-agent interaction network.

6. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 5, characterized in that, The task analysis includes work processes and crew categories; The safety analysis includes safety barriers, unsafe behaviors / states, safety states, and accident types; The process analysis includes interaction functions, interaction conditions, and interaction processes.

7. The safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 5, characterized in that, The historical database includes the ship enterprise's historical operation database and accident reports.

8. A safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 1, characterized in that, Before using the historical database to quantify the probabilities of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process, it also includes: According to the order and possible results of crew members performing tasks in the multi-agent interaction network, determine all possible working condition combinations; According to the working condition combinations, determine the interaction process of agents after the safety barrier is triggered; use the Monte Carlo simulation method to simulate the interaction process of agents after the safety barrier is triggered.

9. A safety barrier performance evaluation method for ship human factor risk control according to claim 1, characterized in that, The risk flow model is specifically: In the formula, it is assumed that there are n nodes in the multi-agent interaction network, λ = (γ ij ), 1×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n. The vector element γ ij is the probability value of all nodes in the multi-agent interaction network. This vector is unknown and needs to be solved. When the corresponding node is an accident type, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability P fl of the ultimate failure of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme. When the corresponding node is the sink node of the work process, the value of γ ij is equal to the probability P succ of the ultimate success of the task under the current safety barrier setting scheme; the matrix C = (c ij ), n×n , i, j = 1, 2,..., n. The element c ij represents the conditional probability from the node v i to v i in the multi-agent interaction network, which can be obtained by statistical analysis of the historical database or Monte Carlo simulation; the matrix W is a diagonal matrix constructed by the sum of the row vector elements of the matrix C; the matrix H is a diagonal matrix of size n×n.

10. A safety barrier performance evaluation system for ship human factor risk control, characterized in that, The system includes: A multi-agent interaction network structure characterization unit, which is used to establish a multi-agent interaction network based on the operation guidance documents for specific areas of the ship, the ship operation safety management system documents, and the on-board operation process. The multi-agents are the information perception and interaction relationships between crew members and between crew members and the operation environment; A local performance evaluation unit for safety barriers, which is used to quantify the local performance of safety barriers, including: dividing safety barriers according to the multi-agent interaction network based on whether the parent node of the node where the safety barrier is located is a safe behavior and state; among them, the safety barrier with the parent node being a safe behavior and state is the first type of preventive barrier, and the safety barrier with the parent node being an unsafe behavior and state is the second type of preventive barrier; using the historical database to quantify the probability of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process; using Monte Carlo simulation to quantify the probability of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered; A global performance evaluation unit for safety barriers, which is used to quantify the global performance of safety barriers, including: taking the probability of the first type of preventive barrier and the second type of preventive barrier being triggered during the operation process, and the probability of the second type of preventive barrier being effective or ineffective after being triggered as inputs, establishing a risk flow model, and calculating the probability of the task being ultimately successful and failed under the current safety barrier setting scheme; A performance guarantee standard establishment unit, which is used to determine the key performance evaluation indicators of safety barriers according to the local performance evaluation results of the safety barriers and the global performance evaluation results of the safety barriers; calculate the importance and sensitivity of the key performance evaluation indicators of the safety barriers, based on the importance and the sensitivity; based on the importance and the sensitivity, draw a barrier management matrix, and adjust the barrier setting scheme in combination with the actual engineering situation.

Images