HSE risk dynamic assessment emergency response system and method

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of security management informatization, and discloses an HSE risk dynamic assessment emergency response system and method, and the system comprises an instance creation module which is used for receiving a service request, creating a risk instance, and determining an initial risk value; the gating verification module is used for executing access gating verification on the risk instance to obtain an access judgment conclusion; the dynamic recalculation evaluation module is used for determining a total risk value according to the flow node state quantity during admission and release; the responsibility correction grading module is used for correcting the total risk value according to the responsibility chain integrity and determining a risk state; the response service generation module is used for generating a response service packet according to the risk state; the task linkage module is used for distributing tasks and updating risk results when the tasks are verified to be inconsistent; and the closed-loop processing module is used for performing closed-loop judgment and determining a processing state. According to the invention, real-time identification, grading response and whole-process co-processing of the HSE risk are realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of safety management information technology, specifically relating to an HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system and method. Background Technology

[0002] In the process of enterprise health, safety, and environmental management, multiple business stages are typically involved, including work application, approval workflow, on-site briefing, inspection, hazard rectification, supervision and review, acceptance confirmation, and emergency response. In existing technologies, these stages are often handled by different functional modules or business systems. While this enables basic information recording, process approval, and problem reporting, most management remains focused on a single stage, lacking a continuous tracking and coordinated handling mechanism around the same risk issue. Especially in high-risk operations, anomaly handling, and hazard mitigation scenarios, the risk status is not fixed but continuously changes with the progress of approvals, the implementation of measures, on-site inspection results, rectification status, and responsibility assignment. Existing solutions often fail to reflect this dynamic change in a timely manner.

[0003] Furthermore, in existing management methods, there is often a disconnect between risk assessment results and subsequent actions. A common scenario is that after scoring, grading, or issuing alerts at the front end, managers still need to use their experience to determine the rectification path, responsible party, and escalation method, resulting in insufficient coordination between risk identification, task allocation, and closed-loop processing. At the same time, the responsibilities, review results, and acceptance results at different stages are usually stored separately, easily leading to situations where problems are reported but responsibilities are unclear, rectification has been submitted but review has not been confirmed, and processes appear to be completed but are not actually closed, thus affecting the timeliness, accuracy, and traceability of risk management. Summary of the Invention

[0004] This invention provides an HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system and method, which solves the technical problems in related technologies such as the fragmentation of various business links in HSE management, the inability to conduct unified dynamic assessment of risk status as the process changes, the difficulty in effectively linking assessment results with rectification and emergency response, and insufficient closed-loop control capabilities.

[0005] This invention provides an HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system, comprising: The instance creation module is used to receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. It determines the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. The gate control verification module is used to obtain personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, handover record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to risk instances, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusions. The dynamic recalculation and assessment module is used to obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node when the admission judgment conclusion is to release, and to dynamically recalculate the total risk value based on the state quantity. The responsibility correction and grading module is used to obtain the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the number of responsibility nodes already confirmed for a risk instance, determine the integrity of the responsibility chain, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status. The response business generation module is used to generate response business packages corresponding to risk instances based on risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information. The task linkage module is used to distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions, and update the status variables when the verification results are inconsistent, and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. The closed-loop processing module is used to obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

[0006] This invention also provides an emergency response method for dynamic assessment of HSE risks, comprising the following steps: Step 81: Receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. Determine the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. Step 82: Obtain the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusion; Step 83: When the admission judgment conclusion is to allow passage, obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node, and dynamically recalculate based on the state quantity to obtain the total risk value. Step 84: Obtain the total number of responsible nodes to be confirmed and the number of confirmed responsible nodes for the risk instance, determine the integrity of the chain of responsibility, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status; Step 85: Generate the response business package corresponding to the risk instance based on the risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information; Step 86: Distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions. If the verification results are inconsistent, update the status quantity and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. Step 87: Obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

[0007] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: This invention uses risk examples as the main thread, unifying the processes of work application, approval, briefing, inspection, rectification, review, acceptance, and emergency response into a single processing chain. This enables centralized carrying and full-process tracking of risk information, avoiding the problems of information dispersion and disconnected status in existing management. By setting up access control, dynamic recalculation, and responsibility chain correction mechanisms, risk results can be updated in a timely manner as process nodes change, and the implementation of responsibilities can be comprehensively considered, improving the consistency between risk assessment results and actual business status. By generating response business packages based on risk status and linking task distribution, risk assessment results can be directly transformed into subsequent supervision, rectification, or emergency response actions, reducing manual judgment and conversion steps and improving handling efficiency. Through consistency verification of rectification and review, as well as a closed-loop judgment mechanism, the results of problem handling can be continuously verified and rolled back, improving the rigor, traceability, and business collaboration capabilities of closed-loop management. Attached Figure Description

[0008] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of a module of an HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0009] The subject matter described herein will now be discussed with reference to exemplary embodiments. It should be understood that these embodiments are discussed only to enable those skilled in the art to better understand and implement the subject matter described herein, and changes may be made to the function and arrangement of the elements discussed without departing from the scope of this specification. Various processes or components may be omitted, substituted, or added as needed in the examples. Furthermore, features described in some examples may be combined in other examples.

[0010] It should be noted that, unless otherwise defined, the technical or scientific terms used in one or more embodiments of the present invention should have the ordinary meaning understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. The terms "first," "second," and similar terms used in one or more embodiments of the present invention do not indicate any order, quantity, or importance, but are merely used to distinguish different components. Terms such as "comprising" or "including" mean that the element or object preceding the word encompasses the elements or objects listed after the word and their equivalents, without excluding other elements or objects. Terms such as "connected" or "linked" are not limited to physical or mechanical connections, but can include electrical connections, whether direct or indirect. Terms such as "upper," "lower," "left," and "right" are used only to indicate relative positional relationships; when the absolute position of the described object changes, the relative positional relationship may also change accordingly.

[0011] like Figure 1 As shown, an HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system includes: The instance creation module is used to receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. It determines the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. The gate control verification module is used to obtain personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, handover record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to risk instances, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusions. The dynamic recalculation and assessment module is used to obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node when the admission judgment conclusion is to release, and to dynamically recalculate the total risk value based on the state quantity. The responsibility correction and grading module is used to obtain the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the number of responsibility nodes already confirmed for a risk instance, determine the integrity of the responsibility chain, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status. The response business generation module is used to generate response business packages corresponding to risk instances based on risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information. The task linkage module is used to distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions, and update the status variables when the verification results are inconsistent, and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. The closed-loop processing module is used to obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

[0012] In this invention, HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response refers to the technical process of continuously identifying, updating in real time, classifying, and coordinating the handling of risk states generated in work activities, inspection activities, hazard management activities, supervision and review activities, and related emergency response activities, all within the framework of health, safety, and environmental management scenarios. HSE risk is not merely a static hazard existing in a specific location, equipment, or environment, but rather a process-oriented risk that changes with the progress of business processes such as work application, approval workflow, briefing confirmation, on-site inspection, anomaly reporting, rectification, supervision and review, and acceptance confirmation, depending on the process status, responsibility assignment status, anomaly changes, and handling results. Dynamic assessment means that the system does not provide a fixed risk conclusion all at once, but rather recalculates, corrects, and updates the risk value or risk level in stages based on the status quantities corresponding to risk instances at different process nodes, reflecting the actual risk level under the current business conditions. Emergency response refers to generating appropriate handling actions, task categories, responsible entities, notification scope, processing time limits, escalation paths, or review requirements according to preset business rules after obtaining the risk assessment results, and promoting the relevant responsible entities to execute the corresponding handling procedures.

[0013] In one embodiment of the present invention, after receiving a business request, the system creates a corresponding risk instance, generates a unique identifier, and associates the risk instance with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. An initial risk value is determined based on the location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. The business request refers to electronic request data formed by any of the following business actions: work application, inspection trigger, hazard reporting, and event reporting. The risk instance refers to a full-process data carrier established around a single HSE risk management matter, used to uniformly carry subsequent gate control verification, dynamic evaluation, task distribution, and closed-loop processing results. The location object refers to a data object representing the work location, work area, or job position spatial location. The work object refers to a data object representing the work category, work content, work time period, and participating roles. The hazard source object refers to a data object representing the hazard source type, hazard factors, and their associated control requirements. The responsible organization object refers to a data object representing the attribution relationship of the responsible department, responsible position, or responsible personnel. The approval chain object, supervision object, acceptance object, and emergency object are respectively used to represent approval flow relationships, supervision relationships, acceptance relationships, and emergency response relationships.

[0014] Specifically, in step 11, the system parses the business request, extracts location information, operation information, hazard source association information, and responsible organization information, creates a risk instance, and generates a unique identifier based on the organization code, location code, receipt time, and sequence number. This unique identifier is then written into the risk instance. The organization code identifies the enterprise or management organization, the location code identifies the specific workspace, the receipt time represents the moment the business request enters the system, and the sequence number distinguishes different business requests within the same time period. By combining these fields to generate a unique identifier, each risk instance remains uniquely traceable throughout its entire lifecycle. This provides a unified index foundation for subsequent cross-node transfers, responsibility tracing, and status updates, avoiding object confusion or data fragmentation during parallel processing of multiple modules.

[0015] Step 12: Based on the parsing results of the business request, associate the risk instance with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. Extract work type information from work objects and hazard source category information from hazard source objects. Association refers to establishing data reference relationships or mapping relationships within the risk instance that point to the corresponding business objects, enabling the risk instance to access the attribute data contained in each object. Work type information is used to represent business categories such as work at height, hot work, and confined space work; hazard source category information is used to represent risk source categories such as mechanical injury, fire and explosion, and toxic and hazardous exposure. By establishing these association relationships, the risk instance is no longer an isolated record but becomes a unified management object that can integrate work scenarios, hazard source attributes, and responsibility chain structures, thus providing structured input for subsequent risk assessment and response orchestration according to business rules.

[0016] Step 13: Match the basic risk template based on the location, job type, and hazard category information; read the basic risk level; multiply the basic risk level by a preset value to determine the initial risk value; and write the initial risk value into the risk instance. Here, the basic risk template refers to a pre-configured rule template used to represent the basic risk level under different locations, job types, and hazard combinations; the basic risk level refers to the level result output by the template; and the preset value is a conversion parameter used to convert the level result into a calculable risk value. The system can complete template matching using table lookup matching, rule engine matching, or configuration file calls. By converting the basic risk level into the initial risk value, a unified quantitative starting point can be formed when the risk instance is created, allowing subsequent abnormalities, overdue periods, and missing responsibilities added at each process node to be continuously accumulated and corrected from this starting point.

[0017] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment transforms HSE risks from decentralized management items into unified risk instances, enabling risk objects to possess identity identification, object association, and initial quantitative results when business requests enter the system. On the one hand, this facilitates data integration between work applications, approval supervision, hazard management, and emergency response, improving the efficiency of business status identification and task collaboration. On the other hand, it provides a consistent data entry point and calculation benchmark for subsequent dynamic risk assessment, chain of responsibility correction, and response business generation, thereby enhancing the real-time performance, traceability, and process linkage of HSE risk management, and reducing response delays caused by information dispersion, unclear responsibilities, and status disconnect.

[0018] In one embodiment of the present invention, after completing the creation and basic association of a risk instance, the system obtains the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information, and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance, and performs access control verification based on the above information to obtain an access judgment conclusion. The access control verification refers to a pre-verification process conducted before a risk instance enters subsequent dynamic assessment and response processing to determine whether it meets the conditions for entering the formal business process. The personnel access conditions information refers to information such as personnel qualifications, training completion status, authorization status, or on-duty status that match the current operation or business matter. For example, in special operation scenarios, it can verify whether the operator has the corresponding operation certificate and whether pre-job safety training has been completed. The approval chain status information refers to the completion status of the current business matter in the approval process, such as whether the application has been submitted and whether it has been reviewed by the designated approval position. The briefing record information refers to the briefing data generated regarding the current work content, safety requirements, and risk issues; the key measure confirmation information refers to the implementation status of control measures, protective measures, isolation measures, or work preparation measures related to the current risk issue, such as whether equipment power-off tagging has been completed, and whether on-site warnings or ventilation checks have been implemented. The basic field filling information refers to whether the necessary fields required to be entered in the business request are complete and meet the format requirements; the responsibility chain establishment information refers to whether the approval, supervision, acceptance, and emergency response responsibilities corresponding to this risk instance have been clearly defined and implemented, such as checking whether the rectification responsible person, review responsible person, and acceptance responsible person have established a corresponding relationship with this risk instance.

[0019] Specifically, in step 21, the system obtains the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information, and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance. Among these, personnel access conditions information can be obtained from a personnel qualification database, training record database, job authorization record, or attendance record; approval chain status information can be obtained from the node completion status in the electronic approval workflow; briefing record information can be obtained from briefing confirmation forms, receipt records, or briefing attachments; key measure confirmation information can be obtained from on-site inspection results, measure confirmation records, or equipment status records; and basic field filling information can be obtained from the field validation results of the business request form itself. The responsibility chain establishment information is determined based on the association status between the responsible organization object, approval chain object, supervision object, acceptance object, and emergency response object and the risk instance. In other words, the system checks whether the responsible departments, responsible positions, approval nodes, supervision nodes, acceptance nodes, and emergency response nodes related to the risk instance have been bound. If there are cases where associations are not established or are incomplete, the responsibility chain establishment information is considered incomplete.

[0020] Step 22: The system compares the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, handover record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information, and responsibility chain establishment information with the corresponding preset verification rules to obtain a set of gate control results. The preset verification rules refer to pre-set judgment criteria for different gate control items, such as whether personnel possess the corresponding qualifications, whether the approval has reached the specified node status, whether the handover has been completed and signed, whether key measures have been confirmed and implemented, whether all required fields have been filled, and whether the responsibility chain has been fully established. The set of gate control results includes verification results corresponding to each piece of information, and each verification result can be recorded as either pass or fail. Since the data sources, judgment logic, and business significance of different gate control items are different, this embodiment uses a method of separate comparison and separate output of results, which can clearly retain the verification conclusion of each gate control condition, facilitating subsequent identification of the blocking cause and generation of targeted correction content.

[0021] Step 23: The system counts the total number of gated items and the number of gated items that passed verification in the gated result set. The number of passed gated items is divided by the total number of gated items to obtain the gated pass coefficient. The gated pass coefficient reflects the overall degree to which the current risk instance meets the admission criteria, and its value can be set to zero to one. When all gated items pass, the gated pass coefficient is one; when any gated item fails, the gated pass coefficient is less than one. Using the gated pass coefficient to uniformly merge multiple verification results allows for the retention of individual results while forming a comprehensive judgment basis that facilitates subsequent system processing. This transforms the admission judgment from scattered individual conclusions into an overall result that can directly participate in process control.

[0022] Step 24: The system determines the access decision based on the gate control pass coefficient. When the gate control pass coefficient is one, the access decision is "allow," allowing the risk instance to proceed to the subsequent dynamic recalculation, risk classification, and response business generation stages. When the gate control pass coefficient is less than one, the access decision is "block," and a blockage reason list and rectification tasks are generated based on the failed items in the gate control result set. The blockage reason list refers to a list of issues formed by classifying and organizing the content of the failed gate control items. The rectification tasks refer to the rectification, supplementary recording, supplementary signing, supplementary review, or supplementary confirmation tasks automatically generated for each failed item, and can be sent to the corresponding responsible parties.

[0023] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment can complete unified gating of personnel, approvals, briefings, measures, fields, and responsibility chains before risk instances enter dynamic assessment, avoiding distortion of subsequent risk assessment results or incorrect emergency response targets due to missing basic information, unfulfilled responsibilities, or inadequate preparation measures. Furthermore, by combining the access determination conclusion with the list of blocking reasons and corrective tasks, the system can automatically intercept and redirect business items that do not meet the conditions, improving the standardization and coordination of business process handling, and enhancing the pre-constraint capabilities, task flow efficiency, and closed-loop management effectiveness throughout the entire HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response process.

[0024] In one embodiment of the present invention, when the admission determination conclusion is "release," the system obtains the status quantity of the risk instance at the current process node and dynamically recalculates based on the status quantity to obtain the total risk value. The dynamic recalculation means that when the risk instance undergoes status changes at different business nodes such as application, approval, disclosure, inspection, rectification, review, and acceptance, the system does not use the initial risk result at creation, but recalculates and updates the risk level based on the actual processing situation reflected at the current node. The status quantity refers to a set of quantitative information that reflects the degree of risk change at the current process node, used to describe whether the risk instance at the current node has missing information, abnormal additions, delayed rectification, unfulfilled responsibilities, or processing returns.

[0025] Specifically, in step 31, when the access determination conclusion is "release," the system extracts status quantities based on the current process node of the risk instance. These process nodes can be application nodes, approval nodes, disclosure nodes, on-site inspection nodes, rectification nodes, review nodes, or acceptance nodes. Status quantities include the number of incomplete items, the number of newly added anomalies, the number of unrectified items, the number of overdue items, the number of inconsistencies in review, the number of items lacking responsibility, and the number of rejections. The number of incomplete items is determined based on the required and completed items corresponding to the current process node. In other words, the system counts the number of information items that are required to be entered at this node but have not yet been entered. For example, when a rectification node requires rectification measures, rectification time, and rectification instructions, if only part of the content is filled in, the unfilled portion can be counted as an incomplete item. The number of newly added anomalies is determined based on newly registered anomalies in the current process node, such as newly recorded equipment anomalies, environmental anomalies, or operational anomalies during on-site inspections. The number of unrectified items is determined based on anomalies in the current process node that have not yet been rectified. The number of overdue items is determined based on items that have not been completed beyond a preset processing time limit, which can be pre-configured according to business type, risk level, or management rules. The number of items with discrepancies between the rectification results and the review conclusions is determined based on the number of items where the rectification responsibility party submits them as completed but the review party has not confirmed them. The number of items with missing responsibilities is determined based on items in the current process node where responsibility assignment or confirmation has not been completed. For example, if a rectification task has been generated but the receiving responsible party has not yet been clearly identified, this item can be included in the number of items with missing responsibilities. The number of rejections is determined based on the number of times a risk instance is returned in the current processing flow, reflecting situations where the risk instance has repeatedly failed to meet requirements in previous processing stages.

[0026] Step 32: The system obtains fixed rule weights corresponding one-to-one with each state variable component. These fixed rule weights are provided by a preset rule table, and a node evaluation matrix is ​​constructed with process nodes as rows and each state variable component as columns. The fixed rule weights refer to pre-set influence parameters for different state variables, used to distinguish the magnitude of the impact of different types of problems on risk values. For example, compared to incomplete information, overdue or inconsistent matters usually have a greater impact on risk control, and therefore can be assigned higher weights. The preset rule table can be configured according to the company's HSE management system, operational risk control requirements, or historical management experience. The node evaluation matrix records the values ​​of various state variables under a certain process node and their corresponding relationships, enabling the system to organize and call state data from different nodes according to a unified structure.

[0027] Step 33: Based on the node evaluation matrix, the system multiplies each state variable by its corresponding fixed rule weight and accumulates the products to determine the node risk increment. The node risk increment refers to the additional impact of the current process node on the risk value relative to the initial state. In other words, the more problems a node has, and the more severe the problem types, the greater its corresponding node risk increment; conversely, if the current node has complete information, few anomalies, clear responsibilities, and smooth processing, the node risk increment is lower. By combining and accumulating the various state variables with their corresponding weights, the system can uniformly convert node problems from different sources and of different natures into a single risk increment result, facilitating its merging with the initial risk value in subsequent stages.

[0028] Step 34: The system adds the initial risk value to the node risk increment to obtain the recalculation result, and determines the total risk value based on the recalculation result. If the recalculation result is less than zero, the total risk value is set to zero; if the recalculation result is greater than the preset risk value upper limit, the total risk value is set to the preset risk value upper limit; if the recalculation result is between zero and the preset risk value upper limit, the total risk value is set as the recalculation result. The preset risk value upper limit is used to limit the calculation range of the risk value, keeping the risk result within a uniform standard range, which facilitates subsequent risk rating, response business generation, and task distribution. By setting upper and lower limit constraints, abnormal expansion or meaningless negative values ​​of the risk value due to fluctuations in local node data can be avoided, enhancing the stability and comparability of the risk results.

[0029] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment can dynamically recalculate the risk instance based on its status changes at different process nodes, once the risk instance has met the admission criteria. This ensures that the risk result is no longer limited to the basic judgment at the creation stage, but continuously reflects dynamic factors such as new anomalies, delayed rectification, lack of responsibility, and repeated rejections during business processing. On the one hand, this helps the system to promptly identify situations where risks escalate during processing, improving its ability to continuously track high-risk business matters. On the other hand, it also ensures that subsequent risk status determination, response level generation, and task linkage are based on the latest business status, thereby improving the real-time performance, accuracy, and process coordination in the HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response process.

[0030] In one embodiment of the present invention, the system obtains the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the number of responsibility nodes already confirmed for a risk instance, determines the completeness of the responsibility chain, and corrects the total risk value based on the completeness of the responsibility chain to obtain the corrected risk value, thereby determining the risk status. The responsibility chain refers to the relationship of responsibility assumption and confirmation that should exist around the risk instance at the current processing stage, including but not limited to the connection relationship of responsible entities in the stages of responsibility organization, approval, supervision, acceptance, and emergency response; the completeness of the responsibility chain refers to the proportion of responsibility nodes that have been implemented to the total number of responsibility nodes to be implemented for the current risk instance, used to reflect the degree of responsibility implementation for the risk instance at the current stage. Unlike risk assessment based solely on the number of anomalies, overdue status, and other business statuses, this embodiment further incorporates the responsibility implementation status into the risk correction process, so that the risk result not only reflects what happened, but also who is responsible for handling it and whether the handling relationship has been clearly defined. By introducing responsibility chain correction into the total risk value, HSE risk dynamic assessment can be made more closely aligned with the actual business management process, avoiding delays in risk handling due to unclear responsible entities or missing responsibility assumptions.

[0031] Specifically, in step 41, the system determines the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the total number of confirmed responsibility nodes for a risk instance at the current processing stage based on the responsible organization object, approval chain object, supervision object, acceptance object, and emergency object. The system then divides the total number of confirmed responsibility nodes by the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed to obtain the responsibility chain completeness. The total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed refers to the number of nodes that should have completed responsibility binding, responsibility acceptance, or responsibility confirmation according to the business rules of the current processing stage; the total number of confirmed responsibility nodes refers to the number of nodes among the responsibility nodes to be confirmed that have already completed responsibility implementation. For example, in the rectification stage, it is usually necessary to clarify at least the rectification responsibility entity and the review responsibility entity; if only the rectification responsibility entity has been confirmed, but the review responsibility entity has not yet been confirmed, the corresponding responsibility chain completeness can be obtained accordingly. Furthermore, when entering the acceptance or emergency response stage, acceptance responsibility nodes or emergency response responsibility nodes can be further included in the statistical scope. By dynamically determining the scope of responsibility nodes according to the current processing stage, the responsibility chain completeness can be kept consistent with the actual process status, rather than using a fixed set of responsibility items, thereby improving the targeting of responsibility assessment.

[0032] Step 42: The system obtains the total risk value, the completeness of the chain of responsibility, and the fixed correction amount for missing chain of responsibility. The fixed correction amount for missing chain of responsibility is determined by preset correction rules. The degree of missing chain of responsibility is determined by subtracting the completeness of the chain of responsibility from one. The fixed correction amount for missing chain of responsibility is multiplied by the degree of missing chain of responsibility to obtain the corrected value. The total risk value is then added to the corrected value to obtain the corrected risk value. The fixed correction amount for missing chain of responsibility refers to a pre-set correction parameter for incomplete chain of responsibility situations, used to quantify the additional impact of unfulfilled responsibilities on the overall risk. The preset correction rules can be configured according to business importance, management level, work type, or enterprise HSE system requirements. A higher degree of missing chain of responsibility indicates more unfulfilled responsibility nodes at the current stage, resulting in a larger corrected value and a correspondingly higher corrected risk value. In other words, under similar business conditions, the more incomplete the chain of responsibility, the higher the risk result given by the system. For example, even if a risk instance does not show a large number of new anomalies, if the responsibilities for rectification, review, and acceptance are not fulfilled, the uncertainty of its subsequent handling is relatively high. The system can improve its risk value through responsibility chain correction.

[0033] Step 43: The system obtains the corrected risk value and determines the risk status based on the first risk threshold, the second risk threshold, the third risk threshold, and the preset risk value upper limit. When the corrected risk value is less than the first risk threshold, the risk status is determined to be under control; when the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the first risk threshold and less than the second risk threshold, the risk status is determined to be under concern; when the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the second risk threshold and less than the third risk threshold, the risk status is determined to be under handling; when the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the third risk threshold, the risk status is determined to be in an emergency state. The first, second, and third risk thresholds are used to divide continuous risk values ​​into discrete risk status intervals so that the system can directly generate corresponding handling requirements and linkage actions; the preset risk value upper limit is used to limit the effective range of the risk value. The under control state indicates that the current risk is in a maintainable and routinely manageable state; the concern state indicates that continuous tracking and strengthened inspection are required; the handling state indicates that a clear rectification or special handling process needs to be initiated; and the emergency state indicates that the risk has reached the level requiring immediate emergency response measures. By mapping the corrected risk value to a finite number of risk states, the system can transform complex risk calculation results into state conclusions that are easy to execute in business operations, providing a unified basis for subsequent task category determination, responsibility routing and distribution, and escalation processing.

[0034] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment further introduces a responsibility chain integrity correction mechanism based on the total risk value. This enables the system to not only identify anomalies, overdue situations, and returns in process nodes, but also to identify management risks arising from insufficient accountability. This avoids situations where problems are discovered but no one is clearly responsible, leading to an underestimation of risk. Furthermore, it allows the risk status classification to more closely reflect actual handling capabilities and organizational coordination, thereby enhancing the guidance role of HSE risk dynamic assessment results for subsequent rectification, supervision, and emergency response. Moreover, by classifying the corrected risk value into controlled, concerned, handling, and emergency states, the system can adopt differentiated handling strategies at different risk levels, improving the timeliness, targeting, and business collaboration efficiency of risk handling.

[0035] In one embodiment of the present invention, the system generates a response service package corresponding to a risk instance based on risk status, job type information, and organizational hierarchy information. The response service package refers to a set of business response data generated for the current risk instance at the current risk level, used to carry the basic information required for subsequent task categories, responsibility distribution, processing paths, and linkage control. Unlike simply outputting risk scores or risk levels, this embodiment, after completing the risk assessment, further converts the risk results into data objects that can directly participate in business processing, thereby enabling the risk assessment results to smoothly connect with subsequent rectification and disposal, supervision and tracking, or emergency response processes. The job type information refers to the job category information corresponding to the current risk instance, such as hot work, confined space work, temporary power supply work, etc.; the organizational hierarchy information refers to the hierarchy information of the responsible organization to which the current risk instance belongs in the organizational structure, such as team level, workshop level, department level, or enterprise level. By comprehensively considering risk status, job type information, and organizational hierarchy information, the system can generate appropriate business response results for different risk scenarios, enabling HSE risk dynamic assessment and subsequent task linkage to form a continuous processing link.

[0036] Specifically, in step 51, the system obtains the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, and organizational level information of the risk instance. The organizational level information is determined based on the responsible organization. A response business package is constructed, and the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, and organizational level information are written into the corresponding fields of the response business package. The unique identifier is used to uniquely locate the risk instance corresponding to the response business package during subsequent task flow, status updates, and result write-back. The risk status reflects the current risk level range of the risk instance. The job type information describes the business scenario corresponding to the risk instance. The organizational level information indicates which level of organization should handle the risk instance. The response business package can be understood as a business response carrier temporarily generated around the risk instance. It contains multiple reserved fields to record the risk instance's identity information, risk assessment results, and subsequent task control information. For example, for risk instances in the same handling state, different job types and different organizational levels may correspond to different processing depths and response paths. Therefore, writing this information uniformly into the response business package facilitates direct invocation in subsequent processing stages.

[0037] Step 52: The system determines the task category based on the risk status in the response business package. Specifically, when the risk status is under control or of concern, the task category is determined as routine supervision; when the risk status is in a handling state, the task category is determined as rectification and handling; and when the risk status is in an emergency state, the task category is determined as emergency response. The task category is then written into the response business package. The task category refers to the main processing method that the system should trigger for the current risk instance, used to define the basic direction of subsequent business actions. Routine supervision indicates that the current risk requires management but has not yet reached the level requiring immediate rectification or emergency response. In this case, the system can enter continuous tracking, routine inspection, or routine supervision processing mode. Rectification and handling indicates that the current risk has reached the level requiring clear rectification responsibility, implementation of rectification actions, and subsequent review. Emergency response indicates that the current risk has reached the level requiring immediate response, rapid notification, and initiation of emergency response procedures. In other words, the risk status is not just for display but directly serves as the basis for determining the task category. For example, under the same operation type, if the risk status escalates from concern to handling, the task category in the response business package will also switch from routine supervision to rectification and handling.

[0038] Step 53: The system writes the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, organizational hierarchy information, and task category from the response business package into the risk instance and associates the response business package with the risk instance. Writing the response business package into the risk instance means synchronously saving the key fields in the response business package to the corresponding data record of the risk instance, ensuring that the risk instance retains the response results for the current stage. Associating the response business package with the risk instance establishes a traceable data correspondence between the two, enabling the system to directly retrieve the corresponding response business package based on the risk instance during subsequent task distribution, review processing, status updates, and closed-loop archiving, and also to reverse-locate the corresponding risk instance based on the response business package. Through write-back and association processing, the response business package is no longer an independent, temporary result, but becomes part of the entire process data of the risk instance. Thus, when the risk status changes subsequently, the system can regenerate a new response business package based on the same risk instance and complete version replacement or result update, thereby ensuring that the response result remains consistent with the risk status.

[0039] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment generates a corresponding response business package after the risk status is determined. This enables the system not only to draw risk conclusions but also to transform those conclusions into structured response results required for subsequent business processing. On the one hand, this helps to integrate risk status, operational attributes, and organizational levels into the business linkage logic, improving the adaptability of response paths under different risk scenarios. On the other hand, it also allows different processing modes such as routine supervision, rectification and disposal, and emergency response to be automatically distinguished and triggered by the system, thereby improving the efficiency of business connection, task organization, and response accuracy in the HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response process. Furthermore, by writing the response business package into the risk instance and establishing a correlation, subsequent task distribution, result feedback, and status updates can all revolve around the same risk instance, enhancing the consistency and traceability of the entire process.

[0040] In one embodiment of the present invention, the system distributes tasks based on response business packages and responsible organization objects, obtains rectification results and review conclusions, and performs verification. When the verification results are inconsistent, the system updates the status variables and redetermines the total risk value, risk status, and response business packages. The responsible organization object refers to a set of responsible departments, positions, or personnel associated with a risk instance, used to determine the entities undertaking different processing tasks. The rectification task refers to a disposal task generated for the unresolved issues in the current risk instance. The review task refers to a task to verify and confirm the rectification results. The rectification result is the processing result data submitted by the rectification entity after completing the rectification. The review conclusion is the confirmation result formed by the review entity after checking the rectification results.

[0041] Specifically, in step 61, the system distributes tasks based on the response business package and the responsible organization object, distributing rectification tasks to the rectification entities corresponding to the responsible organization objects and review tasks to the review entities corresponding to the responsible organization objects, and writing the distribution results into the risk instance. The response business package contains at least the current risk status, task category, and basic business information corresponding to the risk instance, allowing the system to determine the type of processing task to be initiated. The responsible organization object is used to further determine which responsible entity the task should be sent to. The rectification entity is typically a responsible position, team, or department directly related to the abnormal event, while the review entity is typically a position or organizational unit with inspection, supervision, or confirmation responsibilities. For example, when a risk instance enters the rectification and handling stage, the system can send the rectification task to the on-site rectification responsible person and the review task to the supervisor or acceptance personnel. The distribution results may include the task recipient, distribution time, task identifier, and task status, and are written into the risk instance for subsequent tracking of task progress.

[0042] Step 62: The system compares the rectification results of the rectification task and the review conclusion of the review task item by item according to the preset consistency verification rules. The verification results include consistency and inconsistency, and the verification results are written into the risk instance. The preset consistency verification rules can be based on the rectification item list, rectification status, rectification completion time, implementation status of rectification measures, or review confirmation content for item-by-item verification. That is to say, the system does not only determine whether the rectification task has been submitted, but further determines whether the results submitted by the rectification subject have been confirmed by the review subject. If the rectification results and the review conclusion are consistent in the corresponding items, the verification result is determined to be consistent; if one or more rectification items have not been reviewed and confirmed, the verification result is determined to be inconsistent. For example, if the rectification subject submits that a certain equipment abnormality has been handled, but the review subject confirms that the same problem still exists on site, the corresponding item can be identified as inconsistent.

[0043] Step 63: When the verification result is inconsistent, the system updates the number of inconsistent items and the number of rejections based on the original state variables, obtaining the updated state variables. The total risk value is then recalculated according to the aforementioned dynamic recalculation method based on the updated state variables. The number of inconsistent items reflects the number of matters where the rectification results and the review conclusions are not in agreement; the number of rejections reflects the number of times a risk instance is returned in the current processing flow due to unsatisfactory processing results. When the verification result is inconsistent, it indicates that although the current risk instance has undergone rectification, it has not yet reached a level that can be confirmed as acceptable. Therefore, the system converts this inconsistency into a new state variable input and re-involves it in the risk calculation. For example, if a risk instance is rejected after its first rectification, the corresponding number of inconsistent items and the number of rejections increase, which may lead to an increase in the recalculated total risk value.

[0044] Step 64: Based on the recalculated total risk value, the system redetermines the risk status according to the risk status determination method. Then, based on the recalculated risk status, task type information, and organizational hierarchy information, it regenerates the response business package and writes it into the risk instance. In other words, when the rectification result differs from the review conclusion and causes a change in the total risk value, the system further re-determines whether the risk instance is currently in a controlled, concerned, handling, or emergency state, and regenerates a response business package matching the current risk level. If the recalculated risk status remains unchanged, the system can update the time, task, or status fields in the corresponding response business package; if the risk status increases, the system can generate a new response business package to trigger a higher-intensity handling or monitoring action. For example, a risk instance originally in a handling state may be re-determined to a higher risk level after multiple inconsistent reviews, and a new business response result will be generated accordingly. By writing the regenerated response business package into the risk instance, the system ensures that subsequent task flows are always executed based on the latest risk status, thus keeping the response logic synchronized with risk changes.

[0045] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment achieves coordinated processing between rectification execution, review and confirmation, and risk reassessment. This ensures that once a risk instance enters the handling phase, it can not only be assigned to a specific responsible entity but also automatically trigger status updates and risk recalculation if the rectification results are not effectively confirmed. On the one hand, this helps avoid the problem of rectification results being directly accepted without verification, improving the authenticity and credibility of risk handling results. On the other hand, it also allows procedural information such as inconsistencies in review and processing returns to directly affect the total risk value and response business package, enhancing the responsiveness of the HSE risk dynamic assessment emergency response process to actual handling quality. Furthermore, by re-determining the risk status and regenerating the response business package in inconsistent situations, the system can continuously maintain dynamic adjustment capabilities during risk handling, thereby improving the accuracy of task coordination, the rigor of the rectification loop, and the traceability of the overall process.

[0046] In one embodiment of the present invention, the system acquires closed-loop determination information, performs closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtains a closed-loop determination conclusion, and determines the processing status accordingly. The closed-loop determination refers to the final judgment process made on whether a risk instance meets the termination conditions after it has undergone access verification, dynamic evaluation, task distribution, rectification processing, review and confirmation, and acceptance processing. The closed-loop determination information refers to a set of result data used to support the final judgment. Unlike methods that only mark the end of the process based on the completion of a single rectification step, this embodiment comprehensively verifies the pre-verification status, rectification implementation status, review and confirmation status, acceptance processing status, and upgrade task completion status of the risk instance, thereby ensuring that the risk instance only enters the termination state when all key aspects meet the requirements.

[0047] Specifically, in step 71, the system acquires closed-loop judgment information, which includes access control verification results, rectification results, review conclusions, acceptance conclusions, task completion results, upgrade task processing results, and risk status. A corresponding set of closed-loop conditions is formed based on each result. Specifically, the access control verification results reflect whether pre-entry issues have been rectified; the rectification results reflect whether identified issues have been rectified; the review conclusions reflect whether the rectification results have been confirmed by the relevant review body; the acceptance conclusions reflect whether the current risk instance has passed the acceptance process; the task completion results reflect whether rectification tasks, review tasks, supervision tasks, or other assigned tasks have been completed as required; the upgrade task processing results reflect whether upgrade tasks generated under conditions of increased risk or task timeout have been processed; and the risk status reflects whether the current risk instance has decreased to a state range that allows entry into the closed-loop judgment before completion. The closed-loop condition set refers to the set of condition items formed by converting each of the above results into corresponding judgment conditions, ensuring that each result corresponds to at least one closed-loop condition that can be judged by the system. For example, if the rectification results show that there are still unresolved rectification items, the closed-loop condition item corresponding to the rectification results can be considered as not being met.

[0048] Step 72: The system performs a satisfaction check on each closed-loop condition item in the closed-loop condition set according to the preset closed-loop judgment rules to obtain the closed-loop condition result. When all closed-loop condition results are satisfied, the closed-loop judgment conclusion is determined to be completed; when any closed-loop condition result is not satisfied, the closed-loop judgment conclusion is determined to be returned. The preset closed-loop judgment rules are used to clarify under what circumstances the risk instance can end and under what circumstances it is necessary to return to the previous step for further processing. Performing a satisfaction check on each item means that the system does not only make a general judgment on the overall result, but checks whether each closed-loop condition is met. For example, although the rectification result and review conclusion of a risk instance have been completed, if the upgrade task processing result shows that there are still unfinished upgrade items, the corresponding closed-loop condition item can still be determined to be unsatisfied, and the system cannot directly give a completion conclusion. As another example, if the current risk status is still at a high risk level that does not allow termination, even if some tasks have been completed, it can be determined that the corresponding closed-loop conditions are not met. By making judgments item by item, we can clearly identify the specific conditions that have not yet been met for risk instances, avoid making judgments on the end of the process too rough, and thus improve the accuracy of closed-loop control.

[0049] Step 73: The system determines the processing status based on the closed-loop judgment conclusion. When the closed-loop judgment conclusion is "complete," the processing status is determined to be "closed-loop completed." When the closed-loop judgment conclusion is "return," the processing status is determined to be "return in progress." The system then determines the return target node based on the unmet closed-loop conditions and their corresponding processing stages, and writes the closed-loop judgment conclusion, processing status, and return target node into the risk instance. Specifically, when an unmet closed-loop condition corresponds to a rectification result, the system returns to the rectification processing stage; when an unmet closed-loop condition corresponds to a review conclusion, the system returns to the review processing stage; when an unmet closed-loop condition corresponds to an acceptance conclusion, the system returns to the acceptance processing stage. The closed-loop completed state indicates that the risk instance has met the termination conditions and can proceed to the archiving, statistics, or subsequent analysis stages; the return in progress state indicates that the risk instance has not yet completed all necessary processing and should return to the corresponding business node for continued execution. The term "return target node" refers to the return position determined based on the processing stage to which the unmet conditions belong. For example, if the unmet condition corresponds to a rectification result, it can be returned to the rectification processing stage; if the unmet condition corresponds to a review conclusion, it can be returned to the review processing stage; and if the unmet condition corresponds to an acceptance conclusion, it can be returned to the acceptance processing stage.

[0050] Through the above implementation process, this embodiment can uniformly verify the pre-entry, rectification, review and confirmation, acceptance processing, task execution, and escalation handling status of risk instances when they enter the final stage, avoiding the problem of terminating the process based solely on a single completion marker. On the one hand, this helps ensure that only risk instances that have truly completed rectification, review, and acceptance and have no outstanding escalation matters can enter the closed-loop completion state, thereby improving the authenticity and closed-loop quality of the entire HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response process. On the other hand, it also enables the system to automatically identify the rollback position and enter the rollback processing state when there are unmet conditions, improving the targeting and processing efficiency of process rollback. Furthermore, by writing the closed-loop judgment result and the rollback target node into the risk instance, the traceability and consistency of the entire lifecycle management of risk instances can be enhanced, providing a reliable data foundation for subsequent statistical analysis, responsibility verification, and management optimization.

[0051] This invention also provides an emergency response method for dynamic assessment of HSE risks, comprising the following steps: Step 81: Receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. Determine the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. Step 82: Obtain the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusion; Step 83: When the admission judgment conclusion is to allow passage, obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node, and dynamically recalculate based on the state quantity to obtain the total risk value. Step 84: Obtain the total number of responsible nodes to be confirmed and the number of confirmed responsible nodes for the risk instance, determine the integrity of the chain of responsibility, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status; Step 85: Generate the response business package corresponding to the risk instance based on the risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information; Step 86: Distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions. If the verification results are inconsistent, update the status quantity and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. Step 87: Obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

[0052] It should be noted that the range and threshold size are set for ease of comparison. The size of the threshold depends on the amount of sample data and the number of bases set by those skilled in the art for each set of sample data, as long as it does not affect the ratio between the parameter and the quantized value.

[0053] The embodiments of the present invention have been described above, but the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described above. The specific embodiments described above are merely illustrative and not restrictive. Those skilled in the art can make many other forms based on the guidance of the present embodiments, all of which are within the protection scope of the present embodiments.

Claims

1. An HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system, characterized in that, include: The instance creation module is used to receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. It determines the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. The gate control verification module is used to obtain personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, handover record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to risk instances, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusions. The dynamic recalculation and assessment module is used to obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node when the admission judgment conclusion is to release, and to dynamically recalculate the total risk value based on the state quantity. The responsibility correction and grading module is used to obtain the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the number of responsibility nodes already confirmed for a risk instance, determine the integrity of the responsibility chain, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status. The response business generation module is used to generate response business packages corresponding to risk instances based on risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information. The task linkage module is used to distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions, and update the status variables when the verification results are inconsistent, and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. The closed-loop processing module is used to obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

2. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Upon receiving a business request, a risk instance is created, a unique identifier is generated, and the risk instance is associated with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency response objects. Based on the location object, work type information, and hazard source category information, the initial risk value is determined, including: Step 11: Parse the business request, extract location information, operation information, hazard source association information and responsible organization information, create a risk instance, and generate a unique identifier based on the organization code, location code, receiving time and serial number, and write the unique identifier into the risk instance; Step 12: Based on the parsing results of the business request, associate the risk instance with the location object, operation object, hazard source object, responsible organization object, approval chain object, supervision object, acceptance object and emergency object, and extract the operation type information from the operation object and the hazard source category information from the hazard source object; Step 13: Match the basic risk template based on the location object, operation type information and hazard source category information, read the basic risk level, multiply the basic risk level by the preset value to determine the initial risk value, and write the initial risk value into the risk instance.

3. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Obtain information on personnel access criteria, approval chain status, briefing records, key measure confirmations, basic field entries, and responsibility chain establishment corresponding to risk instances; conduct access control verification to obtain access judgment conclusions, including: Step 21: Obtain the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance. Among them, the responsibility chain establishment information is determined according to the association status between the responsible organization object, approval chain object, supervision object, acceptance object and emergency object and the risk instance. Step 22: Compare the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, handover record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information with the corresponding preset verification rules to obtain the gate control result set. The gate control result set includes the verification results corresponding to each piece of information. Step 23: Count the total number of gated items and the number of gated items that have passed verification in the gated result set. Divide the number of gated items that have passed verification by the total number of gated items to obtain the gated pass coefficient. Step 24: Determine the admission judgment conclusion based on the gate control pass coefficient. When the gate control pass coefficient is one, the admission judgment conclusion is to allow passage. When the gate control pass coefficient is less than one, the admission judgment conclusion is to block. Generate a list of blocking reasons and correction tasks based on the failed items in the gate control result set.

4. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, When the access decision is to allow passage, the state value of the risk instance at the corresponding process node is obtained. Based on the state value, the total risk value is dynamically recalculated, including: Step 31: When the admission judgment conclusion is to release, extract the status quantity according to the current process node of the risk instance. The status quantity includes the number of completeness missing items, the number of newly added abnormal items, the number of unrectified items, the number of overdue items, the number of review inconsistencies, the number of responsibility missing items, and the number of rejections. Step 32: Obtain the fixed rule weights that correspond one-to-one with each component of the state variable. The fixed rule weights are given by a preset rule table, and a node evaluation matrix is ​​constructed with process nodes as rows and each component of the state variable as columns. Step 33: Based on the node evaluation matrix, multiply each state variable by the fixed rule weight corresponding to that state variable, and sum them up to determine the node risk increment. Step 34: Add the initial risk value to the node risk increment to obtain the recalculation result. When the recalculation result is less than zero, the total risk value is determined to be zero. When the recalculation result is greater than the preset risk value upper limit, the total risk value is determined to be the preset risk value upper limit. When the recalculation result is between zero and the preset risk value upper limit, the total risk value is determined to be the recalculation result.

5. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 4, characterized in that, In step 31, the number of incomplete items is determined based on the required and filled items corresponding to the process node; the number of newly added abnormal items is determined based on the newly registered abnormal items in the process node; the number of unrectified items is determined based on the abnormal items in the process node that have not been rectified; the number of overdue items is determined based on the items in the process node that have exceeded the preset processing time limit and have not been completed; the number of review inconsistencies is determined based on the items where the rectification results are inconsistent with the review conclusions; the number of items with missing responsibilities is determined based on the items in the process node where responsibility assignment or responsibility confirmation has not been completed; and the number of rejections is determined based on the number of times the risk instance has been returned in the current processing flow.

6. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, To obtain risk instances, the total number of responsible nodes and the number of confirmed responsible nodes should be identified, the completeness of the chain of responsibility should be determined, the total risk value should be corrected to obtain the corrected risk value, and the risk status should be determined, including: Step 41: Based on the responsible organization, approval chain, supervision, acceptance, and emergency response targets, determine the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed and the total number of confirmed responsibility nodes for the risk instance in the current processing stage, and divide the total number of confirmed responsibility nodes by the total number of responsibility nodes to be confirmed to obtain the responsibility chain completeness. Step 42: Obtain the total risk value, the integrity of the chain of responsibility, and the fixed repair amount for missing chain of responsibility. The fixed repair amount for missing chain of responsibility is determined by a preset correction rule. Subtract the integrity of the chain of responsibility from one to obtain the degree of missing chain of responsibility. Multiply the fixed repair amount for missing chain of responsibility by the degree of missing chain of responsibility to obtain the chain of responsibility correction value. Add the total risk value to the chain of responsibility correction value to obtain the corrected risk value. Step 43: Obtain the corrected risk value and determine the risk status based on the first risk threshold, the second risk threshold, the third risk threshold, and the preset risk value upper limit. When the corrected risk value is less than the first risk threshold, it is determined to be in a controlled state. When the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the first risk threshold and less than the second risk threshold, it is determined to be in a state of concern. When the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the second risk threshold and less than the third risk threshold, it is determined to be in a state of handling. When the corrected risk value is greater than or equal to the third risk threshold, it is determined to be in an emergency state.

7. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information, generate a response business package corresponding to the risk instance, including: Step 51: Obtain the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, and organizational level information of the risk instance. The organizational level information is determined according to the responsible organization object. Construct a response business package and write the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, and organizational level information into the corresponding fields of the response business package. Step 52: Determine the task category based on the risk status in the response business package. Specifically, when the risk status is under control or under concern, the task category is determined as routine supervision; when the risk status is under handling, the task category is determined as rectification and handling; and when the risk status is under emergency, the task category is determined as emergency response. Write the task category into the response business package. Step 53: Write the unique identifier, risk status, job type information, organizational hierarchy information and task category from the response business package into the risk instance, and associate the response business package with the risk instance.

8. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Tasks are distributed based on the response business package and the responsible organization, rectification results and review conclusions are obtained and verified. If the verification results are inconsistent, the status variables are updated, and the total risk value, risk status, and response business package are redefined, including: Step 61: Distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, distribute the rectification tasks to the rectification entities corresponding to the responsible organization objects, distribute the review tasks to the review entities corresponding to the responsible organization objects, and write the distribution results into the risk instance; Step 62: Based on the preset consistency verification rules, compare the rectification results of the rectification task and the review conclusion of the review task item by item. The verification results include consistency and inconsistency, and write the verification results into the risk instance. Step 63: When the verification result is inconsistent, update the number of inconsistent items and the number of rejections based on the state quantity to obtain the updated state quantity, and redetermine the total risk value according to the dynamic recalculation method in Step 3 based on the updated state quantity. Step 64: Based on the redefined total risk value, redetermine the risk status according to the risk status determination method, and regenerate the response business package based on the redefined risk status, operation type information and organizational hierarchy information, and write the regenerated response business package into the risk instance.

9. The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system according to claim 1, characterized in that, Obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status, including: Step 71: Obtain closed-loop determination information, which includes access control verification results, rectification results, review conclusions, acceptance conclusions, task completion results, upgrade task processing results, and risk status, and form a set of closed-loop conditions corresponding to each result. Step 72: According to the preset closed-loop judgment rules, each closed-loop condition item in the closed-loop condition set is judged to be satisfied to obtain the closed-loop condition result; when all closed-loop condition results are satisfied, the closed-loop judgment conclusion is determined to be completed; when any closed-loop condition result is not satisfied, the closed-loop judgment conclusion is determined to be returned. Step 73: Determine the processing status based on the closed-loop determination conclusion. If the closed-loop determination conclusion is "complete", determine the processing status as "closed-loop completed state". If the closed-loop determination conclusion is "return", determine the processing status as "return to processing state". Determine the return target node based on the processing link to which the unmet closed-loop condition item belongs, and write the closed-loop determination conclusion, processing status and return target node into the risk instance.

10. A dynamic HSE risk assessment and emergency response method, characterized in that, The HSE risk dynamic assessment and emergency response system as described in any one of claims 1-9 includes the following steps: Step 81: Receive business requests, create risk instances, generate unique identifiers, and associate risk instances with location objects, work objects, hazard source objects, responsible organization objects, approval chain objects, supervision objects, acceptance objects, and emergency objects. Determine the initial risk value based on location object, work type information, and hazard source category information. Step 82: Obtain the personnel access conditions information, approval chain status information, briefing record information, key measure confirmation information, basic field filling information and responsibility chain establishment information corresponding to the risk instance, perform access control verification, and obtain access judgment conclusion; Step 83: When the admission judgment conclusion is to allow passage, obtain the state quantity of the risk instance at the process node, and dynamically recalculate based on the state quantity to obtain the total risk value. Step 84: Obtain the total number of responsible nodes to be confirmed and the number of confirmed responsible nodes for the risk instance, determine the integrity of the chain of responsibility, correct the total risk value, obtain the corrected risk value, and determine the risk status; Step 85: Generate the response business package corresponding to the risk instance based on the risk status, operation type information, and organizational hierarchy information; Step 86: Distribute tasks according to the response business package and the responsible organization object, obtain and verify the rectification results and review conclusions. If the verification results are inconsistent, update the status quantity and redetermine the total risk value, risk status and response business package. Step 87: Obtain closed-loop determination information, perform closed-loop determination on risk instances, obtain closed-loop determination conclusions, and determine the processing status.

Images