Fire safety education management system and method based on behavior points

Abstract

The application relates to the field of fire safety education and discloses a fire safety education management system and method based on behavior points, wherein the fire safety education management method based on behavior points comprises the following steps: continuously collecting behavior data generated in a learning platform, marking the behavior data according to the correlation degree of the behavior data with post fire duty and place fire risk grade; performing sequence analysis on original behavior records according to a fire-specific time scale, and extracting fire behavior characteristics; integrating the fire behavior characteristics according to the actual role of each fire behavior in fire prevention, risk reduction and emergency response; aggregating point images according to responsibility units, department functions and risk areas, and distinguishing the management implementation differences of different posts and responsibility roles; and dynamically adjusting point incentive, examination reminder and rectification supervision strategies through the change trend of unit fire management situation maps. The application has the advantage of improving the overall fire safety popular science level.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of fire safety education, specifically to a fire safety education management system and method based on behavior points. Background Technology

[0002] Current fire safety education relies heavily on centralized lectures, disseminating documents, and self-study of courses. This results in fragmented learning progress and a lack of variety in methods, making it difficult for park managers to accurately assess the actual learning status of personnel. While existing technologies provide basic tools such as online classrooms and QR code learning, they still suffer from several shortcomings: First, the learning process is passive and isolated, failing to record learners' participation in activities like answering questions, reviewing, risk identification, and simulations, thus hindering the formation of sustained behavioral patterns. Second, learning effectiveness cannot be precisely measured; most platforms rely solely on viewing time or course completion rates, lacking quantitative indicators for key abilities such as risk awareness and emergency response capabilities. Third, learning motivation is insufficient; learners often prioritize meeting inspection requirements, failing to achieve adequate mastery of fire regulations, fire prevention knowledge, and emergency response procedures to meet management standards. Because learning behaviors cannot be effectively recorded and learning outcomes cannot be quantified and compared, parks cannot establish data-driven incentive mechanisms or scientifically assess whether fire safety managers in each unit are meeting learning standards, hindering the implementation of public education and leaving management decisions without a basis. Therefore, designing a fire safety education management system and method based on behavioral points to improve the overall level of fire safety education is essential. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention provides a fire safety education and management system and method based on behavior points, which has the advantage of improving the overall level of fire safety popularization and solves the problems mentioned in the background technology.

[0004] To achieve the aforementioned goal of improving the overall level of fire safety education, this invention provides the following technical solution: a fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points, comprising the following steps: The behavioral data generated in the learning platform is continuously collected and classified according to the correlation between the behavior and the fire protection responsibilities of the position and the fire risk level of the place, so as to construct the original behavioral records reflecting the fire protection work chain. The original behavioral records were analyzed sequentially according to the fire-specific time scale. Combined with the speed of hazard rectification, changes in drill proficiency, and the continuity of key job actions, fire-fighting behavioral characteristics were extracted. Based on the actual role of each fire-fighting behavior in fire prevention, risk reduction and emergency response, an integral mapping rule matching the fire-fighting task chain is established, the characteristics of fire-fighting behaviors are weighted and integrated, the identification capability of nodes is significantly improved, and multi-source behaviors are transformed into integral profiles that reflect fire management capabilities and responsibility performance. The points profiles are aggregated according to the responsible unit, departmental functions, and risk areas. By presenting changes in hazard management efficiency, education participation activity, and emergency response capabilities, the differences in management implementation among different positions and responsible roles are distinguished, potential weaknesses within the unit are identified, and a fire management situation map of the unit is formed. By analyzing the changing trends in the unit's fire safety management situation map, and combining this with information on weaknesses, targeted learning content is automatically matched, and strategies for point-based incentives, performance reminders, and rectification supervision are dynamically adjusted.

[0005] Preferably, the process of constructing original behavioral records reflecting the firefighting work chain is as follows: Continuous collection of data on personnel's online learning, examinations and assessments, hazard reporting, rectification confirmation, drill attendance and operational feedback will form multi-source behavioral data. Based on a pre-established list of fire safety responsibilities for each position, the responsibilities of the actors in the multi-source behavioral data are matched to identify the subordinate relationship between various behaviors and their corresponding fire safety responsibilities. By combining the building type, population density and historical fire accident information corresponding to the location where the behavior occurred, the fire risk level of the location associated with the behavior data is determined, and the risk level is used as an additional attribute of the behavior. Based on the behavior type, job responsibility matching results, and risk level attributes, the behavior data is classified, labeled, and structured to form original behavior records that can reflect the execution of the fire protection work chain.

[0006] Preferably, the process of performing sequence analysis on the original behavioral records according to the fire-specific time scale is as follows: Based on the business characteristics of fire safety management, the original behavior records are divided into daily education and learning cycles, hidden danger investigation and rectification cycles, and emergency drill evaluation cycles. Within each time period, the order of occurrence, duration, and interval of the behaviors are rearranged to form a time sequence that reflects the rhythm of behavior execution. Alignment processing is performed on behavioral time series formed at different time scales to identify the temporal connection relationship between daily learning, hazard rectification and drills; The aligned multi-scale time series are organized in a unified manner to form behavioral sequence data describing the evolution of fire management activities over time.

[0007] Preferably, the process of extracting firefighting behavior characteristics is as follows: In behavioral sequence data, the entire process of potential hazards from discovery, reporting, rectification implementation to review and approval is tracked and statistically analyzed, the time consumed in each step is calculated, and a quantitative characteristic reflecting the speed of rectification is formed; A comparative analysis was conducted on the sequence of operations completed by personnel, the accuracy rate of operations, and the response time in multiple emergency drills to extract behavioral characteristics that reflect the changing trend of drill proficiency. For the key operational actions clearly defined in the fire protection responsibilities of the position, analyze the completeness, consistency and interruption of execution within the continuous management cycle to form the continuity characteristics of key actions of the position; By integrating the characteristics of rectification speed, drill proficiency, and key action continuity, fire-fighting behavior characteristics are extracted.

[0008] Preferably, the process of establishing an integral mapping rule that matches the fire-fighting task chain is as follows: The fire management task is broken down into fire prevention, hazard control and emergency response task nodes, and a task chain structure is established. Analyze the degree of influence of firefighting behavior characteristics at different task nodes, and determine the contribution weight of various behaviors to task completion; By combining the fire risk level attribute corresponding to the behavior and the quality of behavior execution, the basic contribution weight is dynamically adjusted to form an integral calculation factor; Based on the task chain structure and integral calculation factors, an integral mapping rule corresponding one-to-one with the fire-fighting task chain is established.

[0009] The preferred process for transforming multi-source behaviors into an integrated profile reflecting fire management capabilities and responsibility fulfillment is as follows: According to the integral mapping rule, the corresponding integral is calculated for each behavior in the fire-fighting behavior feature set; The scoring results are weighted and summarized according to the time scale of the behavior, the fire risk level, and the importance of the task node; Analyze the trend of points change within a continuous management cycle to identify capability enhancement nodes where points continue to grow or leap forward. The points results and capability improvement node information are uniformly coded to generate a points profile that reflects the fire management capabilities and responsibility performance of individuals, positions, or groups.

[0010] Preferably, the process of aggregating the points profile by responsible unit, departmental function, and risk area is as follows: Based on the organizational structure, the points profiles are aggregated to the corresponding responsible units and departmental functional units; By combining the building areas covered by the responsible units and the fire risk levels, the points profile is further aggregated based on the risk area dimension; The mean, dispersion, and trend of integrals under different aggregation dimensions are statistically analyzed to form multi-dimensional integral statistical results, and aggregated integral data reflecting the distribution of fire management capabilities of units, departments, and regions are output.

[0011] Preferably, the process of generating a fire safety management situation map for a unit is as follows: Based on aggregated integral data, indicators for hazard management efficiency, activity level of education and learning participation, and change in emergency response capabilities were calculated respectively. Compare and analyze the indicators corresponding to different positions and responsibilities, identify management units with abnormal fluctuations, conduct correlation analysis between abnormal management units and their respective risk areas and task chain nodes, and locate potential weak links within the unit. Various indicators and weaknesses are comprehensively displayed in a visual way to form a fire safety management status map of the unit.

[0012] The preferred process for dynamically adjusting incentive points, performance reminders, and rectification supervision strategies is as follows: Compare and analyze the changes in the unit's fire management status map over a continuous management period to identify positions and responsible units where fire management capabilities are not up to standard. The identified job positions and corresponding responsibility units are compared with the preset job fire safety capability benchmark profile to determine the type of capability gap. Based on the type of capability gap and the corresponding fire-fighting task node, select matching learning content, special drill plans or operation guidelines from the fire education resource library to generate learning content matching results; Based on the matching results of the learning content, and combined with the point weight of the corresponding position and the fire risk level, the point incentive parameters, assessment reminder frequency and rectification supervision priority are dynamically adjusted to form a collaborative fire safety education and management strategy.

[0013] This invention also discloses another technical solution, a fire safety education and management system based on behavior points, comprising: Behavior recording module: Continuously collects various fire-related behavioral data generated by the learning platform and generates raw behavior records; Feature parsing module: Based on the fire-fighting-specific time scale, it performs serialization analysis on the original behavioral records to extract fire-fighting behavioral features; Integral mapping module: Weights and integrates fire-fighting behavior characteristics to form an integral profile reflecting fire-fighting capabilities and responsibility fulfillment. Situation generation module: Aggregates the points profiles by responsible unit, functional department and risk area to form a unit fire management situation map; Strategy Adjustment Module: Dynamically adjust incentive, assessment reminder, and rectification supervision strategies based on the changing trends of the unit's fire safety management situation map.

[0014] Compared with the prior art, the present invention provides a fire safety education and management system and method based on behavior points, which has the following beneficial effects: This invention systematically collects, hierarchically labels, and analyzes multi-source behavioral data generated on a learning platform. It integrates dispersed learning behaviors, hazard management behaviors, and drill operations into a unified fire safety work chain, bridging the gap between fire safety education and daily management activities. By introducing an integral mapping rule that matches the fire safety task chain, the quality, timeliness, and risk relevance of behavioral execution are transformed into quantifiable integral profiles, enabling continuous evaluation of the fire safety management capabilities and responsibility fulfillment of individuals, positions, and responsible units. Through aggregated analysis of these integral profiles across responsible units, departmental functions, and risk areas, a unit fire safety management situation map is generated, intuitively reflecting changes in hazard management efficiency, educational participation activity, and emergency response capabilities. This allows managers to quickly identify differences in management implementation and potential weaknesses across different positions and areas within the unit. Based on the dynamic trends of the situation map, targeted learning content and management intervention measures are automatically matched, and the strategies for points incentives, assessment reminders and rectification supervision are coordinated and adjusted to realize the transformation of fire safety education from passive assessment to proactive guidance and from uniform requirements to differentiated management. This improves the pertinence, continuity and practical effect of fire safety education and enhances the overall fire management capabilities and risk prevention and control level of the unit. Attached Figure Description

[0015] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the method of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0016] The technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0017] Example 1: Please refer to Figure 1 As shown in the figure, a fire safety education and management method based on behavior points in an embodiment of the present invention includes the following steps: S1: Continuously collect behavioral data generated in the learning platform, classify and label the behavior according to its correlation with the job's fire safety responsibilities and the fire risk level of the location, and construct original behavioral records that reflect the fire safety work chain.

[0018] The process of constructing the original behavioral records reflecting the firefighting work chain in S1 is as follows: Continuous data collection is conducted on personnel's online learning, examinations, hazard reporting, rectification confirmation, drill attendance, and operational feedback to form multi-source behavioral data. Relying on the fire safety education and management platform, unified data is collected on personnel's learning behavior, examination behavior, hazard reporting behavior, rectification confirmation behavior, and drill attendance and operational feedback behavior. Learning behavior includes course viewing progress, learning duration, and completion status; examination behavior includes assessment time, score, and distribution of incorrect answers; hazard reporting behavior includes hazard type, location, and reporting time; rectification confirmation behavior includes rectification measures, completion time, and review results; and drill behavior includes attendance records, execution of operational steps, and feedback information. All types of behavioral data are labeled with personnel, time, and source identifiers, and are aggregated into a behavioral data pool through a unified data interface, thus forming a clearly structured and traceable multi-source behavioral data. Based on a pre-established list of fire safety responsibilities for different positions, the system matches the responsibilities of the actors in the multi-source behavioral data to identify the hierarchical relationship between various behaviors and their corresponding fire safety responsibilities. During the platform initialization phase, a list of fire safety responsibilities for different positions is pre-established, describing the fire management responsibilities undertaken by different positions in an itemized manner and associating them with position codes. After the behavioral data collection is completed, the system calls up the list of fire safety responsibilities based on the position information of the actors and performs a matching analysis between the actors and their fire safety responsibilities. By comparing the behavior type with the job responsibility items, the system identifies whether the behavior belongs to the necessary, auxiliary, or extended behaviors within the scope of the job responsibilities and marks the corresponding responsibility type as a behavior attribute, thereby clarifying the hierarchical relationship between various behaviors and fire safety responsibilities. By combining the building type, population density, and historical fire incidents corresponding to the location where the behavior occurred, the fire risk level of the location associated with the behavior data is determined, and the fire risk level is used as an additional attribute of the behavior. In the behavior data, the location information of the behavior occurred is extracted, and based on the pre-established basic information database of the location, the building type, population capacity, and usage of the location are obtained. Combined with historical fire incident records and hazard distribution, the fire risk of different locations is graded and assessed. In the determination process, the building structural characteristics, population density, and frequency of historical incidents are comprehensively considered to output the corresponding fire risk level. The determined fire risk level is used as an additional attribute of the behavior and is bound to the behavior data to reflect the safety risk background of the location where the behavior occurred. Based on behavior type, job responsibility matching results, and fire risk level attributes, behavioral data is graded, labeled, and structured to form original behavioral records that reflect the execution of the fire protection work chain. Behavior types are categorized into learning, rectification, and drill types, and the responsibility attributes of behaviors are identified based on job responsibility matching results. The risk level of a behavior is identified based on the fire risk level. Behavior data with multiple attribute labels is organized in chronological order and structured and stored using personnel, positions, and locations as indexes. This forms a set of original behavioral records that reflect the interconnection between fire protection education, hazard management, and emergency drills, thus providing a complete picture of the execution of the fire protection work chain.

[0019] S2: Perform sequence analysis on the original behavioral records according to the fire protection-specific time scale, and extract fire protection behavioral characteristics by combining the speed of hazard rectification, changes in drill proficiency, and continuity of key job actions.

[0020] The process of performing sequence analysis on the original behavioral records in S2 according to the fire-specific time scale is as follows: Based on the business characteristics of fire safety management, the original behavior records are divided into daily education and learning cycles, hazard investigation and rectification cycles, and emergency drill evaluation cycles. Based on the business process characteristics of fire safety management, the original behavior records are also divided into time periods. The daily education and learning cycle covers continuous behaviors such as fire safety knowledge learning, online training, and examinations; its time span can be set to be rolled out daily or weekly. The hazard investigation and rectification cycle covers hazard discovery, reporting, rectification implementation, and review confirmation; its time span is the entire process from discovery to closed-loop completion of a single hazard. The emergency drill evaluation cycle covers behaviors such as emergency drill preparation, drill implementation, and drill evaluation feedback; its time span is divided based on a single drill task. In this way, different types of fire safety behaviors are incorporated into time periods that match the management rhythm. Within each time period, the order of occurrence, duration, and interval of behaviors are rearranged to form a time sequence reflecting the rhythm of behavior execution. After the time period is divided, the original behavior records belonging to that period are sorted according to their occurrence time within each time period, and the start and end times of each behavior are recorded. Based on the sorting results, the time interval between adjacent behaviors and the duration of a single behavior are calculated to characterize the continuity and rhythm of behavior execution. By uniformly rearranging the behavior sequence, duration, and interval information, a time sequence that reflects the execution rhythm of fire management activities is constructed. Alignment processing of behavioral time sequences formed at different time scales is performed to identify the temporal connection between daily learning, hazard rectification, and drills. Using a unified timeline as a benchmark, behavioral time sequences in the daily education and learning cycle, hazard investigation and rectification cycle, and emergency drill evaluation cycle are mapped to the same time frame. By comparing the temporal sequence of different behavioral sequences, temporal connection characteristics such as whether learning behavior precedes hazard rectification and whether drill behavior occurs in a concentrated manner after a specific rectification stage are identified, thereby revealing the temporal correlation between different types of fire protection behaviors. The aligned multi-scale time series are organized in a unified manner to form behavioral sequence data describing the evolution of fire management activities over time. After the alignment of the multi-time-scale behavioral sequences is completed, various behavioral time series are organized and encapsulated in a unified manner. With the time axis as the main line, different behavioral types and their corresponding time characteristics are combined according to a unified data structure, and the time period to which the behavior belongs and the behavioral attribute mark are retained. Through a unified organization method, behavioral sequence data that can continuously reflect the evolution of management activities such as fire education, hazard management and emergency drills over time is formed.

[0021] The process of extracting firefighting behavior features from S2 is as follows: In behavioral sequence data, the entire process of hazard discovery, reporting, rectification implementation, and review approval is tracked and statistically analyzed. The time consumed at each stage is calculated to form a quantitative feature reflecting the speed of rectification. Based on behavioral sequence data, a complete time-stamped link is established for each hazard record, recording the hazard discovery time, reporting time, rectification start time, rectification completion time, and review confirmation time. By sequentially verifying each time node, the integrity of the hazard handling process is ensured. The time consumed at key stages such as hazard discovery to reporting, reporting to rectification implementation, and rectification implementation to review approval is calculated separately. The time consumed at each stage is combined to form a rectification closed-loop speed feature that reflects the efficiency of hazard handling, used to describe the timeliness and execution efficiency of hazard management. By comparing and analyzing the sequence of operations completed, the accuracy rate of operations, and the response time of personnel in multiple emergency drills, behavioral characteristics reflecting the trend of changes in drill proficiency are extracted. The behavioral records of the same personnel or the same position in multiple emergency drills are collected, and the execution sequence, operation results, and corresponding response time of key operations in each drill are extracted. By comparing the consistency of operation sequence, changes in operation accuracy, and the trend of shortening or lengthening response time in different drill tasks, the familiarity of personnel with the drill process is assessed. Based on the comparative results of multiple drills, behavioral characteristics reflecting the trend of changes in drill proficiency over time are extracted to characterize the improvement or decline of personnel's emergency response capabilities. For key operational actions explicitly defined in the fire safety responsibilities of each position, the completeness, consistency, and interruptions of their execution within a continuous management cycle are analyzed to form the continuity characteristics of key actions for each position. Based on the list of fire safety responsibilities for each position, key fire safety operational actions that need to be performed continuously over a long period are pre-determined and used as the object of continuity analysis. Within a continuous management cycle, the actual execution records of these key operational actions are statistically analyzed to identify any omissions, delays, or duplications. The execution methods and results of key operations in different cycles are compared to determine their consistency. By comprehensively evaluating the completeness, consistency, and interruptions of execution, continuity characteristics reflecting the stable execution capability of key actions for each position are formed. The characteristics of rectification speed, drill proficiency, and key action continuity are integrated to extract fire safety behavior characteristics. By uniting individuals or positions, the characteristics from different sources are summarized in chronological order, while maintaining their corresponding risk levels and responsibilities. Through the integration process, structured and comparable fire safety behavior characteristics are formed.

[0022] S3: Based on the actual role of each fire-fighting behavior in fire prevention, risk reduction and emergency response, establish an integral mapping rule that matches the fire-fighting task chain, integrate the weights of fire-fighting behavior characteristics, significantly improve the identification of nodes, and transform multi-source behaviors into integral profiles that reflect fire management capabilities and responsibility fulfillment.

[0023] The process of establishing integral mapping rules that match the fire-fighting task chain in S3 is as follows: Fire management tasks are broken down into fire prevention, hazard control, and emergency response task nodes, establishing a task chain structure. Based on the overall process of fire safety management, fire management tasks are divided into three core task nodes: fire prevention, hazard control, and emergency response. Fire prevention task nodes cover pre-emptive management behaviors such as fire safety education, system implementation, and daily inspections. Hazard control task nodes cover closed-loop governance behaviors such as hazard investigation, rectification implementation, and review and confirmation. Emergency response task nodes cover behaviors such as emergency drills, emergency response preparation, and response assessment. The task nodes are sequentially linked according to the order of task occurrence and business dependencies to construct a task chain structure that reflects the entire fire management process. The study analyzes the degree of influence of fire-fighting behavioral characteristics at different task nodes and determines the contribution weight of each type of behavior to task completion. After establishing the task chain structure, the extracted fire-fighting behavioral characteristics are classified and aggregated, and mapped to the corresponding task nodes. Behavioral characteristics related to learning and training and system implementation are assigned to the fire prevention node, behavioral characteristics related to the speed of closed-loop rectification of hidden dangers are assigned to the hidden danger control node, and behavioral characteristics related to drill proficiency and response time are assigned to the emergency response node. Within each task node, different basic contribution weights are assigned to different behaviors according to the degree of influence of the behavioral characteristics on the task results, thereby distinguishing the differences in the role of key behaviors and general behaviors in task completion. By combining the fire risk level attribute corresponding to the behavior and the quality of behavior execution, the basic contribution weight is dynamically adjusted to form an integral calculation factor. Based on the determined basic contribution weight, the fire risk level attribute corresponding to the behavior and the quality of behavior execution are introduced to dynamically adjust the basic contribution weight. When the behavior occurs in a high-risk location, the risk weight adjustment coefficient of the behavior is increased accordingly. When the quality of behavior execution is high, such as the rectification is passed on the first try or the accuracy of the drill operation is high, the basic contribution weight is positively adjusted. By combining the basic contribution weight with the risk level attribute and execution quality factor, an integral calculation factor is formed for integral calculation, so that the integral result can more realistically reflect the actual value of the behavior in a specific risk environment. Based on the task chain structure and the integral calculation factors, an integral mapping rule corresponding one-to-one with the fire-fighting task chain is established. After the integral calculation factors are constructed, the characteristics of various fire-fighting behaviors, corresponding task nodes, and integral calculation factors are uniformly associated with the task chain structure as the main line. An integral mapping relationship is established for each task node in the task chain, and the integral generation method of various behaviors under this node is clarified. Through this mapping rule, each fire-fighting behavior can automatically generate corresponding integrals based on its task node, risk attribute, and execution quality when entering the integral calculation stage, thus forming an integral mapping rule system that corresponds one-to-one with the fire-fighting task chain and has a clear logic.

[0024] The process of transforming multi-source behaviors into an integral profile reflecting fire management capabilities and responsibility fulfillment in S3 is as follows: According to the integral mapping rules, the corresponding points are calculated for each behavior in the fire protection behavior feature set. Based on the established integral mapping rules, each behavior in the fire protection behavior feature set is processed item by item to identify the fire protection task node, risk level attribute and execution quality mark corresponding to the behavior. The integral mapping rule matching the task node is called, and the integral conversion of the behavior feature is performed according to the integral calculation factor to obtain the basic integral value of the behavior in the current management cycle. Through this item-by-item calculation method, it is ensured that each fire protection behavior can be converted into a quantifiable integral result according to the unified rules. The scores are weighted and aggregated according to the time scale of the behavior, the fire risk level, and the importance of the task node. Based on the time scale of the behavior, daily learning behavior, hidden danger rectification behavior, and drill behavior are distinguished and different time scale weights are assigned. Combined with the fire risk level of the place where the behavior occurs, behaviors in high-risk places are given higher weights. Based on the importance of the task node in the fire protection task chain, the scores of behaviors corresponding to key nodes are strengthened. Through the superposition of multi-dimensional weights, the individual scores are aggregated to form a phased score result that can reflect the comprehensive management performance. Analyze the trend of points changes within a continuous management cycle to identify capability improvement nodes where points continue to grow or leap forward. After the points are summarized, track and analyze the point changes of the same person, position or group within the continuous management cycle. By comparing the point values ​​in different cycles, identify the change patterns of points that are steadily growing, rapidly improving in stages or leaping forward. When the point change meets the preset improvement judgment conditions, the corresponding time node is marked as a capability improvement node, which is used to indicate the stage in which fire management capabilities or responsibility performance have been significantly improved. The points results and capability improvement node information are uniformly coded to generate a points profile that reflects the fire management capabilities and responsibility performance of individuals, positions, or groups. Taking individuals, positions, or groups as the subject of the profile, their points values, points composition sources, and capability improvement nodes in each management cycle are combined and packaged, and the corresponding task nodes and risk attribute markers are retained. Through a unified coding method, a points profile that can intuitively reflect the level of fire management capabilities, responsibility performance, and their changing trends is generated.

[0025] S4: Aggregate the points profiles by responsible unit, departmental function, and risk area. By presenting changes in hazard management efficiency, educational participation activity, and emergency response capabilities, differentiate the management implementation differences of different positions and responsible roles, identify potential weaknesses within the unit, and form a fire management situation map of the unit.

[0026] In S4, the process of aggregating the points profile by responsible unit, departmental function, and risk area is as follows: Based on the organizational structure, the score profiles are aggregated to the corresponding responsible units and functional departments. Based on the pre-configured organizational structure, the generated score profiles are aggregated at the unit and department levels. The personnel, positions or group information identified in the score profiles are parsed, and the corresponding responsible units and functional departments are determined through the organizational affiliation table. Score profiles under the same responsible unit or the same functional department are centrally stored and marked to form unit-level and department-level score sets. Through this aggregation method, the fire management capability evaluation is mapped from the individual level to the unit and functional level. By combining the building areas and fire risk levels covered by the responsible units, the integral profiles are re-aggregated at the risk area dimension. Based on the building, floor or functional zoning information covered by the responsible units, the integral profiles are mapped to the corresponding spatial areas. Combined with the fire risk level labels of the area, the integral profiles under different risk levels are classified and summarized. By combining organizational affiliation with spatial risk attributes, the integral profiles are reorganized at the regional level, so that the integral results can reflect the actual distribution of fire management capabilities in different risk areas. The system statistically analyzes the mean, dispersion, and trends of integrals under different aggregation dimensions to form multi-dimensional integral statistical results. It outputs aggregated integral data reflecting the distribution of fire management capabilities of units, departments, and regions. The mean of integrals within each aggregation unit is calculated to reflect the overall level of fire management capabilities. The dispersion of integral distribution is analyzed to identify imbalances in management capabilities or differences in responsibility fulfillment. Combined with the changes in integrals over a continuous management period, the trend of integral changes is extracted. Through statistical results, multi-dimensional aggregated integral data is formed as a quantitative basis for reflecting the distribution of fire management capabilities of units, departments, and regions.

[0027] The process of creating a unit fire management situation map in S4 is as follows: Based on aggregated points data, indicators for hazard management efficiency, educational participation activity, and emergency response capability change are calculated separately. Using existing aggregated points data at the unit, department, and risk area levels, indicators are broken down and calculated for different business dimensions of fire management. For hazard management efficiency, the changes in points corresponding to each stage—hazard discovery, reporting, rectification implementation, and review approval—are extracted. Combined with the time consumption of each stage, a management efficiency indicator reflecting the hazard closure speed and rectification execution efficiency is calculated. For educational participation, the number of learning sessions, number of participants, exam completion rate, and corresponding points for scores within a specified period are statistically analyzed to form an educational participation activity indicator. For emergency response capability, the changing trends of emergency drill points over multiple periods are systematically analyzed, and emergency response speed, operational standardization, and overall proficiency are calculated as indicators of emergency response capability change over time. Through these methods, aggregated points are transformed into core indicators for unit fire management with clear management implications. Comparative analysis of indicators corresponding to different positions and responsibilities is conducted to identify management units with abnormal fluctuations. Correlation analysis is performed on abnormal management units with their respective risk areas and task chain nodes to pinpoint potential weaknesses within the unit. Within the same time period, the differences in indicators among different positions or departments are compared to identify management units that are significantly below the unit average or exhibit abnormal fluctuations. Combined with historical periodic data, the situation of continuous decline, sudden change, or long-term stagnation of indicators is analyzed. For the identified abnormal management units, correlation analysis is performed with the fire risk level of the covered building area and the corresponding fire protection task chain nodes to determine whether the anomalies are concentrated in high-risk areas or key task links, thereby pinpointing potential weaknesses within the unit in terms of hazard management, education and training, or emergency response. Various indicators and weaknesses are comprehensively displayed in a visual manner to form a fire management situation map of the unit. Using a zoned display method, indicators such as the efficiency of hazard management, the activity level of education and learning, and changes in emergency response capabilities are displayed in chart form. The location and risk level of weak links are marked on the corresponding organizational structure, job distribution, or building area diagram. By overlaying the indicator results, abnormal units, and risk area information, a fire management situation map that can intuitively reflect the fire management operation status of the unit is formed, providing managers with a basis for overall control, problem identification, and decision support.

[0028] S5: By analyzing the changing trends of the unit's fire safety management situation map, and combining this with the weak points, targeted learning content is automatically matched, and the point incentive, assessment reminder, and rectification supervision strategies are dynamically adjusted.

[0029] The process of dynamically adjusting the points-based incentive, performance reminder, and rectification supervision strategies in S5 is as follows: The system compares and analyzes the changes in the unit's fire management situation map over continuous management cycles to identify positions and responsibility units that fail to meet fire management standards. Using the existing unit fire management situation map as input, the system compares and analyzes the changes in indicators over multiple continuous management cycles. Historical data on indicators such as hazard management efficiency, participation in education and learning, and changes in emergency response capabilities for each position and responsibility unit are extracted and compared with the minimum compliance threshold set by the unit. For positions and responsibility units that consistently fall below the threshold, exhibit abnormal fluctuations, or show a significant downward trend over multiple cycles, the system marks them as units that fail to meet fire management standards. The identified job positions and corresponding responsibility units are compared with the preset job fire safety capability benchmark profile to determine the type of capability gap. The job fire safety capability benchmark profile is constructed by combining historical excellent performance records, regulatory requirements and job fire safety responsibility list. It includes the reasonable point distribution range of various behavioral characteristics under different task nodes. By comparing the differences between the current point profile and the benchmark profile in dimensions such as hazard rectification, learning participation and emergency drills, the links where capability deficiencies occur are identified and the types of capability gaps are determined, such as insufficient hazard rectification implementation, insufficient participation in education and learning and insufficient proficiency in emergency operation. Based on the type of capability gap and the corresponding fire-fighting task node, the system selects matching learning content, special drill plans, or operation guidelines from the fire education resource database to generate learning content matching results. The fire education resource database pre-categorizes and indexes learning materials, drill plans, and operation guidelines according to task type, job applicability, and difficulty level. Based on the task node corresponding to the capability gap, it automatically matches learning courses, special drill procedures, or on-site operation guidelines suitable for the job, forming a structured learning content matching result. Based on the learning content matching results, combined with the corresponding position's point weight and fire risk level, the point incentive parameters, assessment reminder frequency, and rectification supervision priority are dynamically adjusted to form a collaborative fire safety education and management strategy. Point weights are set according to the importance of the position in the fire safety task chain, and differentiated point incentive parameters are assigned to relevant learning completion, drill participation, and rectification execution behaviors based on the fire risk level of the area. For positions with significant capability gaps, the assessment reminder frequency is increased, and rectification items involving high-risk areas or key task nodes are elevated to a priority supervision level. Through the coordinated configuration of incentive, reminder, and supervision strategies, the transformation of fire safety education and management from static assessment to dynamic guidance is achieved.

[0030] Example 2: As Figure 2 As shown, a fire safety education and management system based on behavior points includes: Behavior recording module: Continuously collects various fire-related behavioral data generated by the learning platform and generates raw behavior records; Feature parsing module: Based on the fire-fighting-specific time scale, it performs serialization analysis on the original behavioral records to extract fire-fighting behavioral features; Integral mapping module: Weights and integrates fire-fighting behavior characteristics to form an integral profile reflecting fire-fighting capabilities and responsibility fulfillment. Situation generation module: Aggregates the points profiles by responsible unit, functional department and risk area to form a unit fire management situation map; Strategy Adjustment Module: Dynamically adjust incentive, assessment reminder, and rectification supervision strategies based on the changing trends of the unit's fire safety management situation map.

[0031] It should be noted that, in this document, relational terms such as "first" and "second" are used only to distinguish one entity or operation from another, and do not necessarily require or imply any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Furthermore, the terms "comprising," "including," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of elements includes not only those elements but also other elements not expressly listed, or elements inherent to such process, method, article, or apparatus.

[0032] Although embodiments of the invention have been shown and described, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes, modifications, substitutions and alterations can be made to these embodiments without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the scope of which is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: The behavioral data generated in the learning platform is continuously collected and classified according to the correlation between the behavior and the fire protection responsibilities of the position and the fire risk level of the place, so as to construct the original behavioral records reflecting the fire protection work chain. The original behavioral records were analyzed sequentially according to the fire-specific time scale. Combined with the speed of hazard rectification, changes in drill proficiency, and the continuity of key job actions, fire-fighting behavioral characteristics were extracted. Based on the actual role of each fire-fighting behavior in fire prevention, risk reduction and emergency response, an integral mapping rule matching the fire-fighting task chain is established, the characteristics of fire-fighting behaviors are weighted and integrated, the identification capability of nodes is significantly improved, and multi-source behaviors are transformed into integral profiles that reflect fire management capabilities and responsibility performance. The points profiles are aggregated according to the responsible unit, departmental functions, and risk areas. By presenting changes in hazard management efficiency, education participation activity, and emergency response capabilities, the differences in management implementation among different positions and responsible roles are distinguished, potential weaknesses within the unit are identified, and a fire management situation map of the unit is formed. By analyzing the changing trends in the unit's fire safety management situation map, and combining this with information on weaknesses, targeted learning content is automatically matched, and strategies for point-based incentives, performance reminders, and rectification supervision are dynamically adjusted.

2. The fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of constructing original behavioral records reflecting the firefighting work chain is as follows: Continuous collection of data on personnel's online learning, examinations and assessments, hazard reporting, rectification confirmation, drill attendance and operational feedback will form multi-source behavioral data. Based on a pre-established list of fire safety responsibilities for each position, the responsibilities of the actors in the multi-source behavioral data are matched to identify the subordinate relationship between various behaviors and their corresponding fire safety responsibilities. By combining the building type, population density and historical fire accident information corresponding to the location where the behavior occurred, the fire risk level of the location associated with the behavior data is determined, and the fire risk level is used as an additional attribute of the behavior. Based on the behavior type, job responsibility matching results, and fire risk level attributes, the behavior data is classified, labeled, and structured to form original behavior records that can reflect the execution of the fire protection work chain.

3. The fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 2, characterized in that, The process of performing sequence analysis on the original behavioral records according to the fire-specific time scale is as follows: Based on the business characteristics of fire safety management, the original behavior records are divided into daily education and learning cycles, hidden danger investigation and rectification cycles, and emergency drill evaluation cycles. Within each time period, the order of occurrence, duration, and interval of the behaviors are rearranged to form a time sequence that reflects the rhythm of behavior execution. Alignment processing is performed on behavioral time series formed at different time scales to identify the temporal connection relationship between daily learning, hazard rectification and drills; The aligned multi-scale time series are organized in a unified manner to form behavioral sequence data describing the evolution of fire management activities over time.

4. The fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 3, characterized in that, The process of extracting firefighter behavior characteristics is as follows: In behavioral sequence data, the entire process of potential hazards from discovery, reporting, rectification implementation to review and approval is tracked and statistically analyzed, the time consumed in each step is calculated, and a quantitative characteristic reflecting the speed of rectification is formed; A comparative analysis was conducted on the sequence of operations completed by personnel, the accuracy rate of operations, and the response time in multiple emergency drills to extract behavioral characteristics that reflect the changing trend of drill proficiency. For the key operational actions clearly defined in the fire protection responsibilities of the position, analyze the completeness, consistency and interruption of execution within the continuous management cycle to form the continuity characteristics of key actions of the position; By integrating the characteristics of rectification speed, drill proficiency, and key action continuity, fire-fighting behavior characteristics are extracted.

5. A fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 4, characterized in that, The process of establishing integral mapping rules that match the firefighting task chain is as follows: The fire management task is broken down into fire prevention, hazard control and emergency response task nodes, and a task chain structure is established. Analyze the degree of influence of firefighting behavior characteristics at different task nodes, and determine the contribution weight of various behaviors to task completion; By combining the fire risk level attribute corresponding to the behavior and the quality of behavior execution, the basic contribution weight is dynamically adjusted to form an integral calculation factor; Based on the task chain structure and integral calculation factors, an integral mapping rule corresponding one-to-one with the fire-fighting task chain is established.

6. The fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 5, characterized in that, The process of transforming multi-source behaviors into an integrated profile that reflects fire management capabilities and responsibility fulfillment is as follows: According to the integral mapping rule, the corresponding integral is calculated for each behavior in the fire-fighting behavior feature set; The scoring results are weighted and summarized according to the time scale of the behavior, the fire risk level, and the importance of the task node; Analyze the trend of points change within a continuous management cycle to identify capability enhancement nodes where points continue to grow or leap forward. The points results and capability improvement node information are uniformly coded to generate a points profile that reflects the fire management capabilities and responsibility performance of individuals, positions, or groups.

7. A fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 6, characterized in that, The process of aggregating the points-based profiles by responsible unit, departmental function, and risk area is as follows: Based on the organizational structure, the points profiles are aggregated to the corresponding responsible units and departmental functional units; By combining the building areas covered by the responsible units and the fire risk levels, the points profile is further aggregated based on the risk area dimension; The mean, dispersion, and trend of integrals under different aggregation dimensions are statistically analyzed to form multi-dimensional integral statistical results, and aggregated integral data reflecting the distribution of fire management capabilities of units, departments, and regions are output.

8. A fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 7, characterized in that, The process of creating a fire safety management situation map for an organization is as follows: Based on aggregated integral data, indicators for hazard management efficiency, activity level of education and learning participation, and change in emergency response capabilities were calculated respectively. Compare and analyze the indicators corresponding to different positions and responsibilities, identify management units with abnormal fluctuations, conduct correlation analysis between abnormal management units and their respective risk areas and task chain nodes, and locate potential weak links within the unit. Various indicators and weaknesses are comprehensively displayed in a visual way to form a fire safety management status map of the unit.

9. A fire safety education and management method based on behavioral points according to claim 8, characterized in that, The process of dynamically adjusting the incentive points system, performance evaluation reminders, and rectification supervision strategies is as follows: Compare and analyze the changes in the unit's fire management status map over a continuous management period to identify positions and responsible units where fire management capabilities are not up to standard. The identified job positions and corresponding responsibility units are compared with the preset job fire safety capability benchmark profile to determine the type of capability gap. Based on the type of capability gap and the corresponding fire-fighting task node, select matching learning content, special drill plans or operation guidelines from the fire education resource library to generate learning content matching results; Based on the matching results of the learning content, and combined with the point weight of the corresponding position and the fire risk level, the point incentive parameters, assessment reminder frequency and rectification supervision priority are dynamically adjusted to form a collaborative fire safety education and management strategy.

10. A fire safety education and management system based on behavior points, applied to the fire safety education and management method based on behavior points as described in any one of claims 1-9, characterized in that, include: Behavior recording module: Continuously collects various fire-related behavioral data generated by the learning platform and generates raw behavior records; Feature parsing module: Based on the fire-fighting-specific time scale, it performs serialization analysis on the original behavioral records to extract fire-fighting behavioral features; Integral mapping module: Weights and integrates fire-fighting behavior characteristics to form an integral profile reflecting fire-fighting capabilities and responsibility fulfillment. Situation generation module: Aggregates the points profiles by responsible unit, functional department and risk area to form a unit fire management situation map; Strategy Adjustment Module: Dynamically adjust incentive, assessment reminder, and rectification supervision strategies based on the changing trends of the unit's fire safety management situation map.

Images