Method for establishing ship social risk acceptance criteria based on f-n curve

Abstract

The application discloses a ship social risk acceptance criterion establishment method based on F-N curves, and relates to the technical field of risk analysis. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring accident data and operation economic data of target ship types, and acquiring preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severities; based on the accident data, the operation economic data and the different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values are calculated, the average acceptable risk value being the average acceptable cumulative death frequency of ship accidents; based on the different average acceptable risk values and the different risk aversion coefficients, different risk acceptance criterion curves are constructed; and based on the different risk acceptance criterion curves, risk regions are determined, and the risk acceptance criterion of the target ship type accidents is determined based on the risk regions. According to the method, different acceptabilities are defined for accidents of different severities, a strict risk acceptance criterion is formed, and the risk of serious accidents can be avoided.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of risk analysis technology, and in particular to a method for establishing a ship social risk acceptance criterion based on the FN curve. Background Technology

[0002] Ships face various risks during navigation, such as collisions, contact, fires, and explosions. To further ensure navigation safety, risk assessments should be conducted based on safety analysis using deterministic methods. A crucial aspect of this is establishing appropriate risk acceptance criteria.

[0003] In related technologies, risk acceptance criteria are usually established based on the consequences of the accident itself. However, using the severity of the accident consequences as a "warning line" is insufficient to guide the formulation of risk criteria. The establishment of risk criteria is not enough to fully reflect the public's aversion to accidents. The risk criteria are inaccurate and cannot be applied to the establishment of social risk acceptance criteria for ships. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the aforementioned problems and technical requirements, the applicant proposes a method for establishing ship social risk acceptance criteria based on the FN curve. The technical solution of this application is as follows:

[0005] On the one hand, a method for establishing social risk acceptance criteria for ships is provided, including the following steps:

[0006] A risk aversion coefficient is preset to correspond to different accident severity levels. The risk aversion coefficient is used to characterize the degree of aversion to the accident. The severity of the accident is positively correlated with the risk aversion coefficient.

[0007] Acquire accident data and operational economic data of the target type of vessel. The accident data includes the number of people who died in accidents involving the target type of vessel, and the operational economic data is used to represent the economic value of the operation of the target type of vessel.

[0008] Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated. The average acceptable risk value is the average acceptable cumulative fatality frequency of ship accidents.

[0009] Based on different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients, different risk acceptance criterion curves are constructed.

[0010] Risk regions are determined based on different risk acceptance criterion curves, and risk acceptance criteria for the target class of ship accidents are determined based on the risk regions. The risk regions include a negligible risk region, an As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) risk region, and an unacceptable risk region.

[0011] The further proposed solution is as follows:

[0012] The preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels include:

[0013] The first risk coefficient is defined as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to the severity of the first accident.

[0014] The second risk coefficient is determined as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to the severity of the second accident, wherein the number of deaths corresponding to the severity of the first accident is less than the number of deaths corresponding to the severity of the second accident, and the first risk coefficient is less than the second risk coefficient.

[0015] Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including:

[0016] Based on the accident data, the operating economic data, and the first risk coefficient, a first average acceptable risk value is calculated.

[0017] Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and the second risk coefficient, a second average acceptable risk value is calculated, wherein the first average acceptable risk value is less than the second average acceptable risk value.

[0018] The construction of risk acceptance criterion curves based on different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients includes:

[0019] A first upper intercept and a first lower intercept are determined based on the first average acceptable risk value. The upper intercept is the vertical intercept of the upper boundary, and the lower intercept is the vertical intercept of the lower boundary. The upper boundary and the lower boundary are the boundaries of the ALARP region.

[0020] The slope is determined by the negative value of the first risk coefficient, and a first risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the first upper intercept and the first lower intercept.

[0021] The second upper intercept and the second lower intercept are determined based on the second average acceptable risk value;

[0022] The slope is determined by the negative value of the second risk coefficient, and a second risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the second upper intercept and the second lower intercept.

[0023] The determination of risk regions based on different risk acceptance criterion curves includes:

[0024] Determine the boundary line between the first risk acceptance criterion curve and the second risk acceptance criterion curve, wherein the boundary line is the boundary line corresponding to the boundary point with a low number of deaths;

[0025] The risk area is determined based on the boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line and the boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line.

[0026] The determination of the risk region based on the boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line and the boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line includes:

[0027] The upper boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line is combined with the upper boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target upper boundary.

[0028] The lower boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line is combined with the lower boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target lower boundary.

[0029] The area enclosed by the upper boundary and the lower boundary of the target is defined as the ALARP area, the area outside the upper boundary of the target is defined as the unacceptable risk area, and the area inside the lower boundary of the target is defined as the negligible risk area.

[0030] The target type of vessel is an oil tanker;

[0031] Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including:

[0032] Based on the accident data of the oil tanker, the operating economic data of the oil tanker, and the different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated.

[0033] The acquisition of accident data and operational economic data for the target type of vessels includes:

[0034] Acquire accident data and operational economic data of the target type of vessels within the target period;

[0035] Based on the risk area, the risk acceptance criteria for the target class of ship accidents are determined, including:

[0036] The risk acceptance criteria for the target type of ship accidents within the target period are determined based on the target risk area, which is constructed based on the data within the target period.

[0037] Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including:

[0038] The average acceptable number of potential deaths within the target period is determined based on the operational economic data and the accident data.

[0039] The average acceptable risk value is calculated based on the risk aversion coefficient and the average acceptable number of potential deaths.

[0040] The operational economic data includes at least one of the following: daily operating interest, operating costs, ship construction costs, and annual operating revenue.

[0041] The beneficial technical effects of this application are:

[0042] In this embodiment, different risk aversion coefficients are set for different accident severity levels. These coefficients, along with accident data and operational economic data of the target vessel type, are used to construct a risk acceptance criterion for that vessel type. This criterion serves as a crucial support for risk assessment and risk avoidance. By combining the risk acceptance criteria established with different risk aversion coefficients, different levels of acceptability are defined for accidents of varying severity. This aligns with the public's sensitivity to different accidents, forming a stringent risk acceptance criterion that helps mitigate the risk of serious accidents. Attached Figure Description

[0043] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a method for establishing ship social risk acceptance criteria based on FN curves, provided in an exemplary embodiment of this application;

[0044] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of different risk acceptance criterion curves provided in an exemplary embodiment of this application;

[0045] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the determination of a risk area provided in an exemplary embodiment of this application;

[0046] Figure 4 This is a flowchart of a method for establishing ship social risk acceptance criteria provided in an exemplary embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0047] The specific embodiments of this application will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0048] Please refer to Figure 1 This document illustrates a flowchart of establishing a ship social risk acceptance criterion based on the FN curve, provided in an exemplary embodiment of this application. The method is described using a computer device as an example. The method includes the following steps:

[0049] Step 101: Obtain accident data and operational economic data for the target type of vessel, and obtain the risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels.

[0050] The accident data includes the number of people who died in accidents involving the target type of vessel, the operational economic data is used to represent the economic value of the operation of the target type of vessel, and the risk aversion coefficient is used to characterize the degree of aversion to ship accidents. The severity of the accident is positively correlated with the risk aversion coefficient.

[0051] Risk acceptance criteria represent the overall level of risk acceptable within a specified timeframe or a specific phase of behavior. Since public aversion to accidents varies depending on their severity, this application embodiment pre-sets risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels to ensure the risk acceptance criteria aligns with public aversion to accidents of varying severity. These risk aversion coefficients are then combined with the ship's accident data and operational economic data to establish the ship's risk acceptance criteria.

[0052] In one possible implementation, different accident levels can be defined based on the severity of the accident, and a risk aversion coefficient corresponding to each accident level can be preset. The higher the severity of the accident level, the higher the risk aversion coefficient. Optionally, the accident severity can be divided into two, three, or more accident levels; this embodiment does not limit this.

[0053] In this embodiment, the risk acceptance criterion is established based on the theory of the FN curve (frequency-number of deaths), where the horizontal axis N represents the number of deaths and the vertical axis F represents the cumulative frequency distribution corresponding to the N numbers of deaths. When establishing the risk acceptance criterion, accident data and operational economic data of the target class of ships are obtained, along with preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels, to establish the risk acceptance criterion for the target class of ships.

[0054] Different types of vessels experience accidents at different frequencies, and the operational economic value they generate also varies. Therefore, risk acceptance criteria need to be established separately for each type of vessel. When establishing risk acceptance criteria for a target class of vessels, it is necessary to base them on accident data and operational economic data for that type of vessel. Optionally, the target class of vessels can be passenger ships, oil tankers, or cargo ships, etc. When the target class of vessels is a passenger ship, a risk acceptance criterion for passenger ships can be established based on passenger ship data; when the target class of vessels is an oil tanker, a risk acceptance criterion for oil tankers can be established based on oil tanker data. However, for different types of vessels, the preset risk aversion coefficients for different accident severity levels can be the same or different; this embodiment does not impose such limitations.

[0055] It should be noted that the accident data and operating economic data are from the same target period to establish the risk acceptance criteria corresponding to that target period. As the period is updated, the latest accident data and operating economic data can be obtained to establish the latest risk acceptance criteria. For illustration, data can be obtained on a one-year cycle. However, the risk aversion coefficient used when establishing risk acceptance criteria for different periods is the same, all being preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels.

[0056] Step 102: Based on accident data, operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, calculate different average acceptable risk values.

[0057] In this embodiment of the application, different risk aversion coefficients are preset, and the average acceptable risk value corresponding to the risk aversion coefficient can be calculated based on accident data, operating economic data and a risk aversion coefficient.

[0058] Based on the above example, when two accident levels are defined and two risk aversion coefficients are preset, two average acceptable risk values ​​can be calculated based on the two risk aversion coefficients respectively.

[0059] In this embodiment, the average acceptable risk value is the average acceptable cumulative frequency of deaths in a ship accident. In one possible implementation, the cumulative frequency of deaths greater than or equal to 1 in a single accident is determined as the average acceptable risk value. That is, based on accident data, operational economic data, and a risk aversion coefficient, the cumulative frequency of deaths greater than or equal to 1 in a single accident is calculated and used as the average acceptable risk value.

[0060] Step 103: Based on different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients, different risk acceptance criterion curves are constructed.

[0061] Different risk acceptance criterion curves can be established for different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients. The risk acceptance criterion curve is also known as the FN curve (e.g., ...). Figure 2 and Figure 3 The curve shown is plotted in a log-log coordinate system, with N as the x-axis and F as the y-axis. The y-intercept of the risk acceptance criterion curve is related to the average acceptable risk value, and the slope is related to the risk aversion coefficient.

[0062] In constructing the risk acceptance criterion curve, it is built based on the risk aversion coefficient and its corresponding average acceptable risk value. The average acceptable risk value corresponding to the risk aversion coefficient is a value calculated based on the risk aversion coefficient.

[0063] The risk acceptance criterion curves established based on different risk aversion coefficients characterize the risk acceptability for accidents of different severity.

[0064] Step 104: Determine the risk area based on different risk acceptance criterion curves, and determine the risk acceptance criterion for the target class of ship accidents based on the risk area.

[0065] The risk areas are categorized into three types: negligible risk areas, ALARP risk areas, and unacceptable risk areas. Negligible risk areas indicate low risk, requiring no safety improvement measures. Risks in ALARP risk areas require a balance between benefits and cost reduction to be minimized to the lowest feasible level, i.e., risk should be reduced as much as possible. Unacceptable risk areas represent intolerable risks, necessitating mandatory safety improvement measures.

[0066] In one possible implementation, different risk acceptance criteria curves are used at different stages (different numbers of deaths). Risk areas are determined based on the risk acceptance criteria curves selected at different stages, and risk acceptance criteria are established based on the risk areas. In this way, different levels of acceptability are defined for different accident levels in the risk acceptance criteria, thus establishing a stringent risk acceptance criteria.

[0067] After establishing risk acceptance criteria for the target class of vessels, the predicted risk level is compared with the risk acceptance criteria. Based on the comparison results, safety improvement strategies are determined to mitigate the risk of major accidents. For example, when the comparison results indicate that the predicted risk level is in an unacceptable risk zone, mandatory safety measures must be implemented to reduce the risk of accidents.

[0068] In this embodiment, different risk aversion coefficients are set for different accident severity levels. These coefficients, along with accident data and operational economic data of the target vessel type, are used to construct a risk acceptance criterion for that vessel type. This criterion serves as a crucial support for risk assessment and risk avoidance. By combining the risk acceptance criteria established with different risk aversion coefficients, different levels of acceptability are defined for accidents of varying severity. This aligns with the public's sensitivity to different accidents, forming a stringent risk acceptance criterion that helps mitigate the risk of serious accidents.

[0069] In this embodiment, the establishment of social risk criteria is dynamic, meaning that the social risk criteria are updated periodically. The process of establishing social risk criteria for a target period may include the following steps:

[0070] Step 1: Obtain accident data and operational economic data for the target type of vessels within the target period.

[0071] First, acquire accident data for the target type of vessels within the target period, including the number of fatalities caused by accidents, and acquire operational economic data for the target type of vessels within the target period.

[0072] Optionally, the target vessel type is an oil tanker. This allows for the acquisition of accident data and operational economic data for oil tankers within the target period. Subsequently, based on the accident data, operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​can be calculated.

[0073] Step 2: Determine the average acceptable potential number of deaths within the target period based on operational economic data and accident data.

[0074] When calculating the average acceptable risk value, the average acceptable potential number of deaths within the target period is first calculated based on operating economic data. The average acceptable potential number of deaths within the target period can be determined based on the average fatality rate per unit of Gross National Product (GNP) and the operating economic data of the target class of vessels. Taking oil tankers as an example, the calculation method is as follows:

[0075] PLL A =q·EV

[0076] Among them, PLL A EV represents the average acceptable number of potential deaths within the target period, which is the operating economic value of the oil tanker, calculated based on operating economic data. q is the cumulative occupational accident index, which can be defined as the average fatality rate per unit of GNP.

[0077]

[0078] Among them, D f This represents the number of deaths in occupational accidents, including deaths in oil tanker accidents.

[0079] In the above formula, EV is calculated based on operating economic data within the target period. Optionally, the operating economic data includes at least one of operating interest, operating costs, vessel cost, and annual operating revenue. In one possible implementation, the operating economic value EV can be calculated based on a combination of one or more of these; illustratively, 10% of the vessel cost can be used as the operating economic value.

[0080] For different types of ships, i.e., when the personnel on board only include the crew, the calculation method for the average acceptable potential number of deaths within the target period can refer to the calculation method for oil tankers mentioned above.

[0081] Step 3: Calculate the average acceptable risk value based on the number of deaths, risk aversion coefficient, and average acceptable potential number of deaths in the accident data.

[0082] When analyzing the frequency of personnel deaths in a single accident, the following relationship exists:

[0083]

[0084] Where N is the number of deaths in a single accident; F1 represents the cumulative frequency of a single accident with a death rate greater than or equal to 1; F N denoted as N, representing the cumulative frequency of deaths in an accident that is greater than or equal to N, where b is a preset risk aversion coefficient.

[0085] For the frequency of an accident with N deaths, we have:

[0086]

[0087] F N+1 F represents the cumulative frequency of an accident where the number of deaths is greater than or equal to N+1. N This represents the cumulative frequency of accidents with a death toll greater than or equal to N. The difference between N and N is the frequency of an accident with a death toll of N. u N represents the upper limit of the possible number of deaths in an accident, taking an oil tanker as an example. u This refers to the total number of crew members.

[0088] For the FN curve S with a slope of -b F-N The calculation equation is as follows:

[0089]

[0090] Among them, S F-N PLL of the average acceptable potential number of deaths during the target periodA They have commonalities, that is:

[0091] S F-N =PLL A

[0092] According to the above formula, we can obtain:

[0093]

[0094] Where F1 is the average acceptable risk value, and b is the risk aversion coefficient.

[0095] As can be seen from the above formula, different F1 values ​​can be calculated based on different risk aversion coefficients.

[0096] For different types of vessels, the corresponding average acceptable risk value can be calculated using the above method, which can then be used to establish subsequent risk acceptance criteria.

[0097] In one possible implementation, the preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels may include two different levels of risk aversion coefficients:

[0098] I. The first risk coefficient is determined as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to the severity of the first accident;

[0099] Second, the second risk coefficient is determined as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to the severity of the second accident. The number of deaths corresponding to the severity of the first accident is less than the number of deaths corresponding to the severity of the second accident, and the first risk coefficient is less than the second risk coefficient.

[0100] The severity of accidents is divided into two levels: a first level of accident severity and a second level of accident severity. The first level of accident severity is relatively mild, with fewer casualties, and a first risk coefficient can be preset, which can be 1 for illustrative purposes. The second level of accident severity is more severe, with more casualties than the first level of accident severity, and a second risk coefficient can be preset, which can be 2 for illustrative purposes.

[0101] Subsequently, a first average acceptable risk value can be calculated based on accident data, operating economic data, and a first risk coefficient; and a second average acceptable risk value can be calculated based on accident data, operating economic data, and a second risk coefficient.

[0102] Based on the example above, if the first risk coefficient b1 = 1, then the first average acceptable risk value F1′ is:

[0103]

[0104] If the second risk coefficient b2 = 2, then the second average acceptable risk value F1″ is:

[0105]

[0106] The first average acceptable risk value is less than the second average acceptable risk value.

[0107] Step 4: Based on different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients, construct different risk acceptance criterion curves.

[0108] In one possible implementation, a first risk acceptance criterion curve can be constructed based on a first risk coefficient and a first average acceptable risk value, and a second risk acceptance criterion curve can be constructed based on a second risk coefficient and a second average acceptable risk value.

[0109] When constructing the first risk acceptance criterion curve, the first upper intercept and the first lower intercept are determined based on the first average acceptable risk value. The upper intercept is the y-intercept of the upper boundary, and the lower intercept is the y-intercept of the lower boundary. The upper and lower boundaries are the boundaries of the ALARP region. Then, the slope can be calculated using the negative value of the first risk coefficient, and the first risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the first upper intercept and the first lower intercept.

[0110] In one possible implementation, the first average acceptable risk value of the first order of magnitude can be defined as the first upper intercept, and the first average acceptable risk value of the second order of magnitude can be defined as the first lower intercept. Optionally, the first order of magnitude can be 10 times, and the second order of magnitude can be 0.1 times. That is, the ordinate of the upper boundary line of the first risk acceptance criterion curve is 10F1′, and the ordinate of the lower boundary line is 0.1F1′. Combining the above example, the slope of the first risk acceptance criterion curve is -1.

[0111] When constructing the second risk acceptance criterion curve, the second upper intercept and the second lower intercept are determined based on the second average acceptable risk value. Then, the slope can be calculated using the negative value of the second risk coefficient, and the second risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the second upper intercept and the second lower intercept.

[0112] Similarly, the second average acceptable risk value of the first order of magnitude can be defined as the second upper intercept, and the second average acceptable risk value of the second order of magnitude can be defined as the second lower intercept. Optionally, the first order of magnitude can be 10 times, and the second order of magnitude can be 0.1 times. That is, the ordinate of the upper boundary line of the second risk acceptance criterion curve is 10F1″, and the ordinate of the lower boundary line is 0.1F1″. Combining the above example, the slope of the first risk acceptance criterion curve is -2.

[0113] Indicative, such as Figure 2As shown, the first risk acceptance criterion curve, constructed based on the first risk coefficient and the first average acceptable risk value, includes a first upper boundary 201 and a first lower boundary 202, with a slope of -1; the second risk acceptance criterion curve, constructed based on the second risk coefficient and the second average acceptable risk, includes a second upper boundary 203 and a second lower boundary 204, with a slope of -2.

[0114] Step 5: Determine the risk area based on different risk acceptance criterion curves, and determine the risk acceptance criterion for the target type of ship accident based on the risk area.

[0115] After establishing the first and second risk acceptance curves using the above method, the risk region is determined based on these two curves. This method includes the following steps:

[0116] Step 1: Determine the boundary between the first risk acceptance curve and the second risk acceptance curve. The boundary is the boundary corresponding to the point where the number of deaths is low.

[0117] The first risk acceptance criterion curve is based on the first risk coefficient and corresponds to the first accident severity (i.e., minor accident). The second risk acceptance criterion curve is based on the second risk coefficient and corresponds to the second accident severity (serious accident). The risk tolerance corresponding to the first risk acceptance criterion curve is higher than the risk tolerance corresponding to the second risk acceptance criterion curve.

[0118] In one possible implementation, a first risk acceptance criterion curve can be used for minor accidents, while a second risk acceptance criterion curve can be used for serious accidents to raise the standard of risk acceptance and establish a more stringent risk acceptance criterion for serious accidents. In this process, the boundary line between the first and second risk acceptance criterion curves can be determined. Specifically, there are two intersection points for similar boundaries (such as a first upper boundary and a second upper boundary) between the first and second risk acceptance criterion curves. The boundary line can be determined based on the intersection point with a low number of fatalities. Then, using this boundary line as the boundary, the first and second risk acceptance criterion curves are selected.

[0119] Indicative, such as Figure 3 As shown, the boundary line 301 is determined based on the first risk acceptance criterion curve and the second risk acceptance criterion curve.

[0120] Step 2: Determine the risk area based on the boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line and the boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line.

[0121] Among them, the x-coordinate (number of deaths) corresponding to the boundary to the left of the boundary line is less than the x-coordinate corresponding to the boundary line itself, while the x-coordinate (number of deaths) corresponding to the boundary to the right of the boundary line is greater than the x-coordinate corresponding to the boundary line itself.

[0122] Optionally, the upper boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line is combined with the upper boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target upper boundary.

[0123] Optionally, the lower boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line can be combined with the lower boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target lower boundary.

[0124] Subsequently, the area enclosed by the upper and lower boundaries of the target is defined as the ALARP area, the area outside the upper boundary of the target is defined as the unacceptable risk area, and the area inside the lower boundary of the target is defined as the negligible risk area.

[0125] Indicative, such as Figure 3 As shown, the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line 301 and the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line 301 are combined to obtain the target upper boundary 302 and the target lower boundary 303. Then, the area outside the target upper boundary 302 can be defined as the risk unacceptable area; the area inside the target lower boundary 303 can be defined as the risk negligible area; and the area enclosed by the target upper boundary 302 and the target lower boundary 303 can be defined as the ALARP area.

[0126] Based on the operational economic data and accident data within the target period, as well as the preset risk aversion coefficient, different risk acceptance criterion curves can be constructed. Combining different risk acceptance criterion curves yields the target risk area corresponding to the target period, thereby determining the risk acceptance criterion corresponding to the target period.

[0127] The above embodiments are illustrated by taking the combination of two risk aversion coefficients and two risk acceptance criterion curves to obtain a risk area, but this does not constitute a limitation. That is, three or more risk aversion coefficients can be preset and three or more risk acceptance criterion curves can be combined to obtain the final risk area.

[0128] In this embodiment, the risk acceptance criteria are dynamically updated based on accident data and operational economic data from different periods, so that the risk acceptance criteria meet the requirements of different stages; and different risk acceptance criterion curves are established for accidents of different severity levels, so as to achieve the application of different risk acceptance criteria for accidents with different casualty levels, which is more in line with the public's sensitivity to accidents.

[0129] In conjunction with the above embodiments, in one possible implementation, the method for establishing a social risk criterion includes the following process:

[0130] Step 401: Obtain basic data.

[0131] The basic data includes accident data and operational economic data, as well as risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels.

[0132] Step 402: Calculate the average acceptable risk value.

[0133] By using the acquired accident data, operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated.

[0134] Step 403: Based on the average acceptable risk value and the risk aversion coefficient, plot the risk acceptance criterion curve in the form of an FN curve.

[0135] Different risk acceptance criterion curves are plotted based on different average acceptable risk values ​​and different risk aversion coefficients.

[0136] Step 404: Determine the risk area based on the boundary line of the risk acceptance criterion curve, and determine the risk acceptance criterion based on the risk area.

[0137] By selecting the upper and lower boundaries of the target based on the intersection of different risk acceptance criteria curves, the risk area can be determined, and thus the risk acceptance criteria can be determined based on the risk area.

[0138] The specific implementation methods can be referred to in the above embodiments, and will not be repeated in this embodiment.

[0139] The above descriptions are merely preferred embodiments of this application, and this application is not limited to the above embodiments. It is understood that other improvements and variations that can be directly derived or conceived by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and concept of this application should be considered to be included within the protection scope of this application.

Claims

1. A method for establishing a ship social risk acceptance criterion based on the FN curve, characterized in that, The method includes: The system acquires accident data and operational economic data for target-type vessels, and obtains risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels. The accident data includes the number of deaths caused by accidents involving target-type vessels. The operational economic data represents the economic value of the operation of the target-type vessels. The risk aversion coefficient characterizes the degree of aversion to vessel accidents. The severity of the accident is positively correlated with the risk aversion coefficient. The preset risk aversion coefficients corresponding to different accident severity levels include: determining a first risk coefficient as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to a first accident severity level, and determining a second risk coefficient as the risk aversion coefficient corresponding to a second accident severity level. The number of deaths corresponding to the first accident severity level is less than the number of deaths corresponding to the second accident severity level, and the first risk coefficient is less than the second risk coefficient. Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including: calculating a first average acceptable risk value based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and the first risk coefficient; calculating a second average acceptable risk value based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and the second risk coefficient, wherein the first average acceptable risk value is less than the second average acceptable risk value; the average acceptable risk value is the average acceptable cumulative fatality frequency of ship accidents; A first upper intercept and a first lower intercept are determined based on the first average acceptable risk value. The upper intercept is the y-intercept of the upper boundary, and the lower intercept is the y-intercept of the lower boundary. The upper boundary and the lower boundary are the boundaries of the ALARP region. A first risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the negative value of the first risk coefficient and the first upper intercept and the first lower intercept. A second upper intercept and a second lower intercept are determined based on the second average acceptable risk value. A second risk acceptance criterion curve is constructed based on the negative value of the second risk coefficient and the second upper intercept and the second lower intercept. The boundary line between the first risk acceptance criterion curve and the second risk acceptance criterion curve is determined, and the boundary line is the boundary line corresponding to the boundary point with low fatalities; based on the boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line and the boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line, a risk area is determined, and based on the risk area, the risk acceptance criterion for the target class of ship accidents is determined, wherein the risk area includes a negligible risk area, a risk with the lowest possible ALARP area, and an unacceptable risk area.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the risk region based on the boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line and the boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line includes: The upper boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line is combined with the upper boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target upper boundary. The lower boundary of the first risk acceptance criterion curve to the left of the boundary line is combined with the lower boundary of the second risk acceptance criterion curve to the right of the boundary line to obtain the target lower boundary. The area enclosed by the upper boundary and the lower boundary of the target is defined as the ALARP area, the area outside the upper boundary of the target is defined as the unacceptable risk area, and the area inside the lower boundary of the target is defined as the negligible risk area.

3. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The target type of vessel is an oil tanker; Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including: Based on the accident data of the oil tanker, the operating economic data of the oil tanker, and the different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated.

4. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The acquisition of accident data and operational economic data for the target type of vessels includes: Acquire accident data and operational economic data of the target type of vessels within the target period; Based on the risk area, the risk acceptance criteria for the target class of ship accidents are determined, including: The risk acceptance criteria for the target type of ship accidents within the target period are determined based on the target risk area, which is constructed based on the data within the target period.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, Based on the accident data, the operational economic data, and different risk aversion coefficients, different average acceptable risk values ​​are calculated, including: The average acceptable number of potential deaths within the target period is determined based on the operational economic data and the accident data. The average acceptable risk value is calculated based on the risk aversion coefficient and the average acceptable number of potential deaths.

6. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that, The operational economic data includes at least one of the following: daily operating interest, operating costs, ship construction costs, and annual operating revenue.

Images