Inspection support device, inspection support method and program

Abstract

To provide an inspection support device, an inspection support method, and a program capable of making inspection more efficient.SOLUTION: An inspection support device 10 includes: a comparison part 120 for comparing an attribute of an inspection object with an attribute of a past inspection object in an inspection history; a generation part 130 for generating inspection items in inspection of an inspection object on the basis of the comparison result, and an inspection result of the past inspection object in the inspection history; and an output part 140 for outputting the inspection items. An attribute of an inspection object is compared with an attribute of a past inspection object in an inspection history, and inspection items in inspection of an inspection object are generated and the inspection items are outputted on the basis of a comparison result, and an inspection result of the past inspection object in an inspection history.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present disclosure relates to techniques for assisting inspections. [Background technology]

[0002] Compared to large cities, other regions, especially core cities, have observed a decline in the quality of on-site inspections of fire prevention facilities conducted by fire departments. This decline in the quality of on-site inspections is manifested, for example, as a decrease in the number of violations found during each inspection. When violations are found, orders and warnings are issued. The number of violations found is manifested as the number of orders and warnings. The decline in the quality of on-site inspections may be due to the fact that, compared to large cities, the number of on-site inspections in other regions, such as core cities, is low, which may be due to the lack of effective transfer of on-site inspection know-how. Furthermore, while the number of fire prevention facilities is increasing, the rate of on-site inspections is declining. This is likely due to a lack of manpower, which makes it difficult to increase the number of inspections. Even if there is a lack of transfer of know-how and an increase in manpower is not possible, improving the efficiency of on-site inspections is necessary to prevent a decline in the rate of on-site inspections. Examples of techniques for improving inspection efficiency are disclosed in the following literature.

[0003] Patent document 1 describes a method of outputting a violation judgment screen containing building information of a specified building obtained from a database and violation judgment items set according to the type of fire inspection, obtaining the judgment results, and outputting the judgment results in a specified format.

[0004] Patent Document 2 describes an inspection management system that includes a personal computer and a handheld terminal. A database stores multiple inspection locations defined for each piece of equipment and inspection history data for each inspection location. The inspection locations and corresponding inspection histories that match the equipment to be inspected are downloaded to a memory card in the personal computer. The handheld terminal displays the inspection locations of the equipment to be inspected that have been read from the memory card, and extracts and displays areas requiring maintenance based on the inspection results entered according to the display and the inspection history. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0005] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2004-86382 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 6-11365 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] In the technologies of Patent Documents 1 and 2, the items or inspection locations that are output and displayed are the same regardless of the results obtained from past judgments. Therefore, the technologies of Patent Documents 1 and 2 do not allow for knowledge of the inspection items that correspond to the results of past judgments. Therefore, the technologies of Patent Documents 1 and 2 do not allow for the efficiency of inspections based on the results of past judgments. One of the purposes of the present disclosure is to provide an inspection support device etc. that can further improve the efficiency of inspections. [Means for solving the problem]

[0007] An inspection support device according to one aspect of the present disclosure includes a comparison means for comparing the attributes of an inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in an inspection history, a generation means for generating inspection items for an inspection of the inspection target based on the results of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection targets in the inspection history, and an output means for outputting the inspection items.

[0008] An inspection support device according to one aspect of the present disclosure compares the attributes of an inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in an inspection history, and generates inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the results of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection targets in the inspection history, and outputs the inspection items.

[0009] A program according to one aspect of the present disclosure causes a computer to perform a comparison process that compares the attributes of an inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in an inspection history, a generation process that generates inspection items for an inspection of the inspection target based on the results of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection targets in the inspection history, and an output process that outputs the inspection items. [Effects of the Invention]

[0010] The present disclosure has the effect of making inspections more efficient. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0011] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support device according to a first embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 2] FIG. 2 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the operation of the inspection support device according to the first embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 3] FIG. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support system according to the second embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 4] FIG. 4 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support device according to the second embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 5] FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the operation of the inspection support device according to the second embodiment of the present disclosure. [Figure 6] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of a computer that can realize an inspection support device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0012] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present disclosure will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

[0013] First Embodiment First, a first embodiment of the present disclosure will be described.

[0014] <Configuration> FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support device according to a first embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example illustrated in FIG. 1, the inspection support device 10 includes a comparison unit 120, a generation unit 130, and an output unit 140. The comparison unit 120 compares the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history. The generation unit 130 generates inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the comparison result and the inspection results of past inspection targets in the inspection history. The output unit 140 outputs the inspection items.

[0015] An inspection is, for example, an inspection by the fire department (hereinafter also referred to as a fire department inspection). An inspection target is, for example, a building, etc. that is the subject of a fire department inspection. An inspection target is also referred to as a fire prevention object. A fire department inspection is, for example, an on-site inspection of a fire prevention object by a fire department headquarters of a prefecture, etc. An fire prevention object is, for example, a building, etc. for which inspection by the fire department (in other words, on-site inspection) is required by law. Such buildings, etc. are generally places where an unspecified number of people gather.

[0016] The attributes of the inspection target are values ​​that represent the characteristics of the inspection target. Examples of the attributes of the inspection target include the site area, the total floor area, and the use classification. The attributes of the inspection target may include an identifier that identifies the inspection target.

[0017] The inspection history is a history of inspections conducted in the past. The inspection history includes attributes of inspection targets inspected in the past and the results of the inspection. The inspection results indicate whether or not an inspector found a violation for each inspection item (hereinafter also referred to as an inspection item). The inspection results may be represented, for example, by either a value indicating a violation or a value indicating no violation. The inspection results may be represented, for example, by either a value indicating a violation, a value indicating no violation, or a value indicating no judgment. The values ​​indicating a violation, a value indicating no violation, and a value indicating no judgment are each different values ​​and are determined appropriately. Hereinafter, values ​​of the inspection results other than the value indicating no violation are referred to as values ​​indicating a problem. The values ​​indicating a problem are values ​​indicating a violation and values ​​indicating no judgment. The inspection items are determined according to the attributes of the inspection targets. The inspection items include, for example, mandatory inspection items for which inspection is mandatory and optional inspection items for which inspection is optional. Whether an inspection item is mandatory or optional is indicated by the mandatory nature of the inspection item. The inspection history may include the results of multiple past inspections. In that case, the inspection history may include a combination of the inspection results and the date and time the inspection was conducted.

[0018] <Comparator 120> As described above, the comparison unit 120 compares the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history. Specifically, the comparison unit 120, for example, compares the attributes of a specified inspection target with the attributes of each inspection target included in the inspection history. The inspection target is specified, for example, by a user of the inspection support device 10. The comparison unit 120 may generate a vector containing each of one or more attributes as elements from the one or more attributes. The relationship between the attribute and the value of the element representing the attribute may be determined appropriately for each attribute. In this case, the comparison unit 120 calculates the value of the element representing the attribute from the attribute according to the predetermined relationship. The relationship between the attribute and the value of the element representing the attribute may be determined, for example, so that the regions of all elements are in the same range (e.g., 0 to 1). The comparison unit 120, for example, compares a target attribute vector, which is a vector representing the attributes of the inspection target, with a past attribute vector, which is a vector representing the attributes of past inspection targets. Specifically, the comparison unit 120 calculates a value representing the closeness between the target attribute vector and the past attribute vector. The closeness between the target attribute vector and the past attribute vector is, for example, the distance between the target attribute vector and the past attribute vector, defined in the space of the target attribute vector and the past attribute vector. In the definition of the distance, the contribution to the distance does not necessarily have to be the same for each element of the vector. For example, in the definition of the distance, weights that are not necessarily the same for each element of the vector may be used.

[0019] The result of the above comparison is the distance between the target attribute vector representing the attributes of the inspection target and each of the target attribute vectors representing the attributes of past inspection targets.

[0020] The comparison unit 120 sends the result of the comparison to the generation unit 130 .

[0021] <Generation unit 130> The generating unit 130 receives the comparison result from the comparing unit 120 .

[0022] As described above, the generation unit 130 generates inspection items (specifically, information on the inspection items) for the inspection of the inspection target based on the results of the comparison and the past inspection results of the inspection target in the inspection history, for example, as follows.

[0023] For example, the generation unit 130 selects past inspection targets that satisfy a predetermined condition from the inspection history based on the comparison result. Specifically, the generation unit 130 selects past inspection targets from the inspection history whose attributes, the proximity of which to the attributes of the inspection target obtained as a result of the comparison, satisfies a predetermined condition. An inspection target selected as a past inspection target whose attributes, the proximity of which to the attributes of the inspection target obtained as a result of the comparison, satisfies a predetermined condition, is referred to as a similar inspection target. A past inspection target that is the same as an inspection target is also referred to as an identical inspection target. An identical inspection target is included in similar inspection targets. An example of the predetermined condition is that the above-mentioned distance representing proximity is smaller than a predetermined distance. A condition in which the above-mentioned distance representing proximity is smaller than a predetermined distance is hereinafter referred to as a first condition. An example of the predetermined condition may be that the above-mentioned distance is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number from the closest point. A condition in which the above-mentioned distance is equal to or smaller than a predetermined number from the closest point is hereinafter referred to as a second condition. The predetermined condition may be that at least one of the first condition and the second condition is satisfied. The predetermined condition may be that both the first condition and the second condition are satisfied. The predetermined condition is not limited to the above examples.

[0024] The generation unit 130 then generates inspection items for the inspection target based on the inspection results of the selected past inspection target in the inspection history. Specifically, for example, the generation unit 130 identifies mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the attributes of the inspection target. In this embodiment, the generation unit 130 previously stores information on inspection items, including mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, determined, for example, in accordance with laws and regulations, for the attributes of the inspection target. The information on the inspection items is obtained, for example, by an administrator of the inspection support device 10 from an organization that determines the inspection items, and provided to the generation unit 130. The generation unit 130 then identifies inspection items (hereinafter referred to as inspection items requiring caution) whose values ​​indicate problems in the inspection results of the selected past inspection target from among the inspection items determined for the attributes of the inspection target (hereinafter referred to as inspection items requiring caution). The generation unit 130 may identify inspection items requiring caution from the mandatory inspection items determined for the attributes of the inspection target. The generating unit 130 may identify inspection items requiring caution by other methods. The generating unit 130 generates information representing the inspection items of the inspection target and the inspection items requiring caution as information representing the inspection items in the inspection of the inspection target.

[0025] The generation unit 130 sends information indicating the inspection items to be inspected and the inspection items requiring caution (hereinafter also referred to as inspection target information) to the output unit 140.

[0026] <Output unit 140> The output unit 140 receives the inspection target information from the generation unit 130 .

[0027] The output unit 140 outputs the inspection target (in other words, information about the inspection target). Specifically, the output unit 140 outputs the received inspection target information as information about the inspection target. The generation unit 130 may output, among the inspection items of the inspection target, inspection items requiring careful inspection and inspection items that are not requiring careful inspection in different formats. Specifically, the output unit 140 may output the inspection items requiring careful inspection and inspection items that are not requiring careful inspection in formats that differ in at least one of, for example, character size, weight, color, font, etc. The output unit 140 may assign a predetermined mark, graphic, etc. to either the inspection items requiring careful inspection or the inspection items that are not requiring careful inspection. For example, if a predetermined mark, graphic, etc. is assigned to the inspection items requiring careful inspection, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection items requiring careful inspection to which the predetermined mark, graphic, etc. is assigned and the inspection items that are not requiring careful inspection and to which the predetermined mark, graphic, etc. is not assigned. For example, if a specified mark or figure, etc. is attached to an inspection item that is not a cautionary inspection item, the output unit 140 outputs the cautionary inspection item that is not attached with the specified mark or figure, etc., and the inspection item that is not a cautionary inspection item that is attached with the specified mark or figure, etc.

[0028] <Operation> Next, the operation of the inspection support device 10 according to the first embodiment of the present disclosure will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

[0029] 2 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the operation of the inspection support device 10 according to the first embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example illustrated in FIG. 2, first, the comparison unit 120 compares the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets (step S11). Next, the generation unit 130 generates inspection items based on the comparison result and the inspection results of the past inspection targets (step S12). Then, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection items (step S13).

[0030] <Effects> This embodiment has the advantage of making inspections more efficient because the generation unit 130 generates inspection items based on the results of the comparison between the attributes of the inspection target and the attributes of past inspection targets performed by the comparison unit 120 and the results of inspections of the past inspection targets.The output unit 140 then outputs the generated inspection items (specifically, information on the inspection items).

[0031] <Modification of the first embodiment> As described above, the inspection history may include a combination of the inspection results and the date and time the inspection was performed. Furthermore, the information on the inspection items may include the history of the inspection items. The attributes of the inspection targets and the information on the inspection items for the attributes of the inspection targets may be changed, for example, due to revisions in laws and regulations. Therefore, valid inspection items may vary depending on the period. The history of the inspection items may be, for example, a combination of the information on the inspection items and a validity period indicating the period during which the information on the inspection items is valid.

[0032] The generation unit 130 of this modified example generates inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target further based on the history of the inspection items. Specifically, for example, the generation unit 130 may identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items that became inspection items within a predetermined period of time in the past. The generation unit 130 may identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items that became mandatory inspection items within a predetermined period of time in the past. The generation unit 130 may identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items that became inspection items after the date and time of the previous inspection. The generation unit 130 may identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items that became mandatory inspection items after the date and time of the previous inspection. The generation unit 130 may also identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items that became mandatory inspection items after the date and time of the previous inspection. The generation unit 130 may identify, as inspection items requiring caution, inspection items using other methods that use the history of the inspection items.

[0033] <Second embodiment> Next, a second embodiment of the present disclosure will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.

[0034] <Configuration> Fig. 3 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support system according to a second embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example illustrated in Fig. 3, inspection support system 1 includes inspection support device 100 and terminal device 200. Inspection support device 100 is communicatively connected to terminal device 200, for example, via a communication network.

[0035] <Terminal Device 200> The terminal device 200 is a portable terminal device such as a tablet terminal, a smartphone, or a notebook personal computer. The terminal device 200 includes input devices such as a touch panel, a keyboard, and a mouse, and an output device such as a touch panel or a display. An inspector conducting an inspection uses the input device of the terminal device 200 to input a designation of the inspection target (e.g., an identifier of the inspection target). The terminal device 200 transmits the input designation of the inspection target to the reception unit 110 of the inspection support device 100. The terminal device 200 receives inspection items (specifically, information on the inspection items) from the inspection support device 100 and outputs the received inspection items to an output device. The terminal device 200 receives the inspection results input by the inspector using the input device and sends the received inspection results to the inspection support device 100.

[0036] FIG. 4 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an inspection support device 100 according to a second embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example illustrated in FIG. 4, the inspection support device 100 includes a receiving unit 110, a comparing unit 120, a determining unit 150, a generating unit 130, an output unit 140, a target information storage unit 160, and an item information storage unit 170. The comparing unit 120, the determining unit 150, and the output unit 140 are the same as the comparing unit 120, the determining unit 150, and the output unit 140 of the first embodiment, respectively, except for differences described below. In the example illustrated in FIG. 4, the determining unit 150 is depicted as a separate unit from the generating unit 130, but the generating unit 130 may include the determining unit 150.

[0037] <Reception Section 110> The receiving unit 110 receives attributes of the inspection target, for example, from the terminal device 200. The attributes of the inspection target may include a designation of the inspection target (for example, information that identifies the inspection target, such as an identifier of the inspection target). The receiving unit 110 sends the received attributes of the inspection target to the comparing unit 120.

[0038] The reception unit 110 further receives inspection results of the inspection target, for example, from the terminal device 200. The inspection results received by the reception unit 110 may be inspection results input by the inspector at the terminal device 200 after the inspection target information is output by the output unit 140 as described below. The reception unit 110 stores the received inspection results in the target information storage unit 160 as the inspection history of the inspection target.

[0039] <Target information storage unit 160> The target information storage unit 160 stores a combination of attributes and inspection history for each of a plurality of inspection targets that have been inspected in the past.

[0040] <Comparator 120> The comparison unit 120 receives attributes of the inspection target from the reception unit 110. The comparison unit 120 compares the received attributes of the inspection target with attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history stored in the target information storage unit 160. The comparison unit 120 sends the comparison result to the generation unit 130. As described above, the comparison result is the distance between the target attribute vector representing the attributes of the inspection target and each of the target attribute vectors representing the attributes of past inspection targets.

[0041] <Item information storage section 170> The item information storage unit 170 stores information on inspection items, including mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, determined, for example, in accordance with laws and regulations, for the attributes of the inspection target. The information on inspection items is obtained, for example, by an administrator of the inspection support device 10, from an organization that determines the inspection items, and is stored in the item information storage unit 170.

[0042] <Generation unit 130> The generation unit 130 receives the comparison result from the comparison unit 120. The generation unit 130 generates inspection items (specifically, information on the inspection items) for the inspection of the inspection target based on the comparison result and the past inspection results of the inspection target in the inspection history.

[0043] The generation unit 130 identifies inspection items for the inspection target based on the attributes of the inspection target. Specifically, the generation unit 130 reads information on inspection items, including mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, defined for the attributes of the inspection target from the item information storage unit 170.

[0044] The generation unit 130 sends the comparison result, the past inspection results of the inspection target in the inspection history, and information on the inspection items, including the mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, defined for the attributes of the inspection target to the determination unit 150.

[0045] The generation unit 130 receives the priority of each inspection item of the inspection target from the determination unit 150. The generation unit 130 generates information about the inspection items based on the priority of the inspection items of the inspection target. In this embodiment, the information about the inspection items is, for example, a combination of the inspection items of the inspection target and the priority of the inspection items. The generation unit 130 sends the inspection target information (in this embodiment, the inspection items of the inspection target and the priority of each of the inspection items) to the output unit 140.

[0046] <Determining Unit 150> The determining unit 150 receives from the generating unit 130 the results of the comparison, past inspection results of the inspection target in the inspection history, and information on inspection items, including mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, defined for the attributes of the inspection target. The determining unit 150 determines the priority of each inspection item, including mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items, defined for the attributes of the inspection target, based on the results of the comparison and the past inspection results of the inspection target in the inspection history. The priority represents, for example, the priority of the inspection items in the inspection of the inspection target. The priority of the inspection items may represent the priority of the inspection reminder for each inspection item, provided by the inspection support device 100. In other words, the priority of the inspection items may represent the strength of the inspection reminder for each inspection item, provided by the inspection support device 100. The inspection reminder may, for example, be a reminder to not forget to inspect. The priority of the inspection items does not necessarily represent the order in which the inspection items are displayed.

[0047] Specifically, the determining unit 150 determines the priority of an inspection item based on whether the inspection item is a required inspection item (in other words, the above-mentioned requiredness) and the inspection results of the inspection item in the inspection history of similar inspection targets. The determining unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection item so that the required inspection item has a higher priority than the priority of the optional inspection item. The determination unit 150 determines whether the inspection item is included as an inspection target in the inspection history of the similar inspection target. If the inspection item is included as an inspection target in the inspection history of the similar inspection target, the determination unit 150 determines whether the inspection item is an inspection item requiring caution, which is an inspection item for which the judgment result in the inspection history of the similar inspection target is a value indicating that there is a problem. The determination unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection item so that the priority of the inspection item requiring caution is higher than the priority of the inspection item that is not an inspection item requiring caution.

[0048] The determining unit 150 determines that an inspection item that satisfies the caution conditions exemplified below is an inspection item requiring caution, and determines that an inspection item that does not satisfy the caution conditions is not an inspection item requiring caution. The caution condition is, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined number of inspections or more (e.g., at least one) in the inspection history of similar inspection targets. The caution condition is, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined percentage or more of inspections in the inspection history of similar inspection targets. The caution condition may be, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined number of most recent inspections of similar inspection targets. The caution condition may be, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined percentage or more of the predetermined number of most recent inspections of similar inspection targets. The caution condition may be, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a second predetermined number of inspections or more, which is less than the first predetermined number of inspections, out of a first predetermined number of most recent inspections of a similar inspection target. The caution condition may be, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined percentage or more of inspections conducted within a predetermined period of time of a similar inspection target. The caution condition may be, for example, that the judgment result of an inspection item is a value indicating the presence of a problem in a predetermined number of inspections or more of inspections conducted within a predetermined period of time of a similar inspection target. The caution condition is not limited to the above examples. The caution condition may be, for example, that at least one of the caution conditions exemplified above is satisfied.

[0049] The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item based on the number of times or the proportion of times that the inspection item was determined to be an inspection item requiring caution in the inspection history of similar inspection targets. The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item based on the number of times or the proportion of times that the inspection item was determined to be an inspection item requiring caution in the inspection history of a predetermined number of most recent inspections of similar inspection targets. Specifically, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item such that the greater the number of times or the proportion of times that the inspection item was determined to be an inspection item requiring caution in the inspection history of a predetermined number of most recent inspections of similar inspection targets, the higher the priority of the inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item based on the number of times or the proportion of times that the inspection item was determined to be an inspection item requiring caution in the inspection history of similar inspection targets for a predetermined period of time. Specifically, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item such that the greater the number or percentage of times that the inspection item has been determined to be a caution inspection item in the inspection history of similar inspection targets over a recent predetermined period, the higher the priority of the inspection item. The method of determining the priority is not limited to the above example.

[0050] The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of the inspection items so that the priority of the mandatory inspection items is higher than the priority of the optional inspection items, regardless of the inspection history.

[0051] The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item so that the priority of the inspection item is high based on the above-mentioned inspection history, regardless of whether the inspection item is a required inspection item or an optional inspection item. In this case, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item so that the priority of a required inspection item is higher than the priority of an optional inspection item for inspection items for which there is no difference in priority when the priority of the inspection item is determined based on the inspection history.

[0052] The determining unit 150 may determine a first priority based on whether the inspection item is a required inspection item or an optional inspection item and a second priority of the inspection item based on the inspection history, and may determine the priority of the inspection item using a formula based on the first priority and second priority of the inspection item. The above formula may be a formula representing the sum of the first priority and the second priority. The above formula may be a formula representing the weighted sum of the first priority and the second priority. The above formula is not limited to these examples.

[0053] The determining unit 150 sends the priority of each inspection item of the inspection target to the generating unit 130 .

[0054] <Output unit 140> The output unit 140 receives inspection target information (in this embodiment, inspection items of the inspection target and the priority of each inspection item) from the generation unit 130.

[0055] The output unit 140 outputs the received inspection target information. Specifically, the output unit 140 outputs information on the inspection items of the inspection target to the terminal device 200 based on the priority.

[0056] The output unit 140 outputs, for example, the inspection items of the inspection target in a format based on the priority of the inspection item. Specifically, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection items of the inspection target in a format in which at least one of the character size, weight, color, font, etc. varies depending on the priority. The output unit 140 may assign a mark or graphic associated with a predetermined condition to an inspection item whose priority satisfies the predetermined condition. In other words, if an inspection item satisfies the predetermined condition, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection item and a mark or graphic associated with the predetermined condition that the inspection item satisfies, and if the inspection item does not satisfy the predetermined condition, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection item. In this case, there may be multiple predetermined conditions, and marks or graphics that are not necessarily the same may be associated with each of the multiple predetermined conditions.

[0057] <Operation> FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating an example of the operation of the inspection support device 100 according to the second embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0058] In the example shown in FIG. 5, first, the receiving unit 110 receives information about the inspection target (step S1010). The information about the inspection target is, for example, information about the attributes of the inspection target. Next, the comparing unit 120 compares the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets whose inspection history includes inspection results (step S102). Next, the generating unit 130 selects past inspection targets from past inspection targets whose inspection history includes inspection results based on the comparison results (step S103). The generating unit 130 identifies inspection items for the inspection target based on the attributes of the inspection target (step S104). Mandatory inspection items and optional inspection items for the inspection target are determined based on the attributes of the inspection target. The determining unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection items based on the attributes of the inspection target and the inspection results of the selected past inspection target (step S105). Specifically, the determining unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection items based on the required inspection items and optional inspection items determined by the attributes of the inspection target and the results of past inspections of the selected inspection target. Then, the output unit 140 outputs the inspection items of the inspection target based on the priority (step S106).

[0059] <Effects> This embodiment has the advantage of further improving the efficiency of inspections because the determining unit 150 determines the priority of inspection items based on the results of the comparison between the attributes of the inspection target and the attributes of past inspection targets performed by the comparing unit 120 and the results of inspections of the past inspection targets. The generating unit 130 then generates inspection target information including the inspection items of the inspection target and the priorities of the inspection items, and the output unit 140 receives the inspection target information and outputs the inspection items based on the priorities.

[0060] <First Modification of the Second Embodiment> The reception unit 110 receives a designation of an inspection target (e.g., information that identifies the inspection target, such as an identifier representing the inspection target) from, for example, the terminal device 200. The reception unit 110 sends the history of the inspection target to the comparison unit 120. Furthermore, the target information storage unit 160 stores attributes of the inspection target that may be subject to inspection in addition to the inspection history. The comparison unit 120 receives the designation of the inspection target from the reception unit 110 and receives the attributes of the inspection target identified by the received designation of the inspection target from the target information storage unit 160.

[0061] <Second Modification of the Second Embodiment> As described above, the inspection history may include a combination of the inspection results and the date and time the inspection was performed. The inspection history may include a combination of the inspection results and the date and time the inspection was performed. Furthermore, the information on the inspection items may include the history of the inspection items. The attributes of the inspection targets and the information on the inspection items for the attributes of the inspection targets may change, for example, due to revisions in laws and regulations. Therefore, valid inspection items (i.e., inspection items that are optional inspection items or mandatory inspection items) may vary depending on the period. The history of the inspection items is, for example, a combination of the information on the inspection items and a validity period that indicates the period during which the information on the inspection items is valid.

[0062] The generation unit 130 of this modified example generates inspection items for an inspection of an inspection target further based on the inspection item history. Specifically, the generation unit 130 first identifies inspection items that have been changed since the previous inspection based on the inspection item history.

[0063] The previous inspection may be, for example, the previous inspection of the inspection target. The previous inspection may be, for example, the previous inspection of the inspection target and similar inspection targets. The previous inspection may be, for example, at least one of the inspections of the inspection target within a specified period in the past. The previous inspection may be, for example, at least one of the inspections of the inspection target and similar inspection targets within a specified period in the past. The changed inspection items are, for example, inspection items that have been changed from optional inspection items to mandatory inspection items in the inspection target. The changed inspection items may include new inspection items. The new inspection items are current inspection items of the inspection target that were not inspection items of the inspection target in the previous inspection. The new inspection items may not include new optional inspection items, but may include new mandatory inspection items.

[0064] The generating unit 130 may generate change information for the changed inspection item. The change information may represent, for example, at least one of a change from an optional inspection item to a required inspection item, a change from a required inspection item to an optional inspection item, a new inspection item, a new required inspection item, and a new optional inspection item.

[0065] The generating unit 130 further sends information identifying the changed inspection items to the determining unit 150. The generating unit 130 may further send change information of the changed inspection items to the determining unit 150.

[0066] The determining unit 150 of this modified example further receives information specifying the changed inspection items from the generating unit 130. The determining unit 150 may further receive change information of the changed inspection items from the generating unit 130. The information specifying the changed inspection items and the change information of the changed inspection items are collectively referred to as information of the changed inspection items.

[0067] The determining unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection item further based on the information of the changed inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine the priority such that, among inspection items with the same priority determined without based on the information of the changed inspection item, the priority of the changed inspection item is higher than the priorities of inspection items other than the changed inspection item. For example, the determining unit 150 may calculate a third priority based on the information of the changed inspection item in addition to the above-mentioned first and second priorities. The third priority value of the changed inspection item and the third priority value of the inspection items other than the changed inspection item may be determined in advance as appropriate. The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of the inspection item as the sum of the first priority, second priority, and third priority of the inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine the priority of the inspection item as the weighted sum of the first priority, second priority, and third priority of the inspection item. The priority based on the information of the changed inspection item (e.g., the above-mentioned third priority) may be determined according to the change information of the changed inspection item. For example, the determination unit 150 determines the third priority so that the third priority of the inspection item changed from an optional inspection item to a required inspection item and the third priority of the new required inspection item are higher than the third priorities of the other inspection items. The third priority of the inspection item changed from an optional inspection item to a required inspection item, the third priority of the new required inspection item, and the third priorities of the other inspection items (i.e., the other changed inspection items and the unchanged inspection items) may be determined in advance as appropriate. Note that the third priority values ​​of the unchanged inspection items, the inspection items changed from required inspection items to optional inspection items, and the new optional inspection items may be values ​​(e.g., zero) that do not affect the priorities of those inspection items.

[0068] <Third Modification of Second Embodiment> The receiving unit 110 may further receive the identification information of the inspector. The receiving unit 110 sends the identification information of the inspector to the comparing unit 120, and the comparing unit 120 sends the received identification information of the inspector to the generating unit 130. The generating unit 130 may generate inspection items according to the inspector.

[0069] In this case, the inspection history may include a combination of the results of the inspection, the inspector who performed the inspection, and the date and time the inspection was performed.

[0070] For example, the generation unit 130 extracts inspection items for which a value related to the number of inspections in which the judgment result indicates a problem satisfies a predetermined condition in inspections conducted by an inspector indicated by the received identification information on the inspection target and inspection targets similar to the inspection target during a predetermined period in the past. In this case, the value indicating a problem may be a value indicating no inspections. In addition, the predetermined condition in this case may be that the number of inspections in which the judgment result indicates a problem is a predetermined number or more. In this case, the predetermined condition may be that the proportion of inspections in which the judgment result indicates a problem is a predetermined proportion or more. An inspection item for which a value related to the number of inspections in which the judgment result indicates a problem satisfies a predetermined condition in inspections conducted by an inspector indicated by the received identification information on the inspection target and inspection targets similar to the inspection target during a predetermined period in the past is referred to as an individual problematic inspection item. An individual problematic inspection item may be an inspection item for which a value related to the number of inspections conducted on the inspection target by the inspector indicated by the received identification information during a specified period in the past, the judgment result of which is a value indicating that there is a problem, satisfies a specified condition.

[0071] Furthermore, a value related to the number of inspections for which the judgment result indicates a problem is referred to as "individual problem content." The individual problem content may be at least one of the number of inspections for which the judgment result indicates a problem, or the percentage of inspections for which the judgment result indicates a problem. The information identifying the individual problem inspection item and the individual problem content are collectively referred to as "individual problem inspection item information."

[0072] The generating unit 130 sends information specifying the individual problematic inspection item to the determining unit 150. The generating unit 130 may send the individual problematic inspection item information to the determining unit 150.

[0073] The determining unit 150 determines the priority of the inspection item such that, among inspection items having the same priority determined regardless of whether the inspection item is an individually problematic inspection item, the priority of the individually problematic inspection item is higher than the priority of inspection items other than the individually problematic inspection item. For example, the determining unit 150 may determine a fourth priority based on whether the inspection item is an individually problematic inspection item such that the fourth priority of the individually problematic inspection item is higher than the fourth priority of inspection items other than the individually problematic inspection item. The fourth priority of the individually problematic inspection item and the fourth priority of inspection items other than the individually problematic inspection item may be determined in advance as appropriate.

[0074] The determining unit 150 may determine the fourth priority based on the content of each individual problem. In this case, the determining unit 150 may determine the fourth priority such that, for example, the greater the number of inspections for which the judgment result is a value indicating the presence of a problem, the higher the fourth priority. The determining unit 150 may determine the fourth priority such that, for example, the greater the proportion of inspections for which the judgment result is a value indicating the presence of a problem, the higher the fourth priority.

[0075] The determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the sum of the first priority, the second priority, and the fourth priority of an inspection item as the priority of the inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the weighted sum of the first priority, the second priority, and the fourth priority of an inspection item as the priority of the inspection item.

[0076] This modification can also be applied to the second modification of the second embodiment. In that case, the determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the sum of the first priority, the second priority, the third priority, and the fourth priority of the inspection item as the priority of the inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the weighted sum of the first priority, the second priority, the third priority, and the fourth priority of the inspection item as the priority of the inspection item.

[0077] When this modification is applied to the second modification of the second embodiment, the generation unit 130 may first identify, based on the history of inspection items, inspection items that have been changed since the previous inspection by the inspector identified by the information identifying the inspector. The previous inspection by the inspector identified by the information identifying the inspector is the "previous inspection" exemplified above among the inspections by the inspector identified by the information identifying the inspector in the inspection history. In this case, the modified inspection items presented are referred to as "individual inspector-modified inspection items." The generation unit 130 sends the individual inspector-modified inspection items and the changes to the individual inspector-modified inspection items to the determination unit 150. The individual inspector-modified inspection items and the changes to the individual inspector-modified inspection items are collectively referred to as information on individual inspector-modified inspection items. The determining unit 150 determines the priority of the individual inspector change item further based on the information on the individual inspector change item. For example, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of the inspection item so that, among inspection items with the same priority determined without based on the information on the individual inspector change item, the priority of the individual inspector change item is higher than the priority of inspection items other than the individual inspector change item. Specifically, for example, the determining unit 150 determines the fifth priority of the inspection item so that the fifth priority of the individual inspector change item is higher than the fifth priority of inspection items other than the individual inspector change item. The fifth priority of the individual inspector change item and the fifth priority of inspection items other than the individual inspector change item may be determined in advance as appropriate. For example, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of the inspection item as the sum of the first priority, second priority, and fifth priority of the inspection item. For example, the determining unit 150 may determine the priority of an inspection item to be the weighted sum of the first priority, the second priority, and the fifth priority of the inspection item.

[0078] The determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the sum of the first priority, the second priority, and at least one of the third to fifth priorities of an inspection item as the priority of that inspection item. The determining unit 150 may determine, for example, the weighted sum of the first priority, the second priority, and at least one of the third to fifth priorities of an inspection item as the priority of that inspection item.

[0079] <Other embodiments> The inspection support device according to the above-described embodiment can be realized by a computer including a memory and a processor that executes a program loaded into the memory from a storage medium. The inspection support device according to the above-described embodiment can also be realized by dedicated hardware such as a circuit. The inspection support device according to the above-described embodiment can also be realized by a combination of the above-described computer and dedicated hardware.

[0080] FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of the hardware configuration of a computer 1000 capable of implementing an inspection support device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. In the example illustrated in FIG. 6, the computer 1000 includes a processor 1001, a memory 1002, a storage device 1003, and an I / O (Input / Output) interface 1004. The computer 1000 can also access a storage medium 1005. The memory 1002 and the storage device 1003 are, for example, storage devices such as RAM (Random Access Memory) and a hard disk. The storage medium 1005 is, for example, a storage device such as RAM or a hard disk, a read-only memory (ROM), or a portable storage medium. The storage device 1003 may also be the storage medium 1005. The processor 1001 can read and write data and programs from and to the memory 1002 and the storage device 1003. The processor 1001 can access, for example, a terminal device 200 via the I / O interface 1004. The processor 1001 can access a storage medium 1005. The storage medium 1005 stores a program that causes the computer 1000 to operate as an inspection support device according to one embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0081] Processor 1001 loads a program stored in storage medium 1005 that causes computer 1000 to operate as an inspection support device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure into memory 1002. Then, processor 1001 executes the program loaded into memory 1002, causing computer 1000 to operate as an inspection support device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0082] The receiving unit 110, the comparing unit 120, the generating unit 130, the output unit 140, and the determining unit 150 can be realized, for example, by a processor 1001 that executes a program loaded into a memory 1002. The target information storage unit 160 and the item information storage unit 170 can be realized by the memory 1002 or a storage device 1003 such as a hard disk drive included in the computer 1000. Some or all of the receiving unit 110, the comparing unit 120, the generating unit 130, the output unit 140, the determining unit 150, the target information storage unit 160, and the item information storage unit 170 can also be realized by dedicated circuits.

[0083] Furthermore, some or all of the above-described embodiments can be described as, but are not limited to, the following supplementary notes.

[0084] (Appendix 1) a comparison means for comparing the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history; a generating means for generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the result of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection target in the inspection history; an output means for outputting the inspection items; An inspection support device comprising:

[0085] (Appendix 2) a determining means for determining the priority of the inspection items based on the result of the comparison; Furthermore, The output means outputs the inspection items in a format based on the priority of the inspection items. 1. The inspection support device described in Appendix 1.

[0086] (Appendix 3) The determining means determines the priority based on the necessity of the inspection items determined based on the attributes and the inspection results of the past inspection targets selected based on the results of the comparison. 1. The inspection support device described in Appendix 2.

[0087] (Appendix 4) The determining means determines the priority of the inspection items that had problems in the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison so as to be higher than the priority of the inspection items that had no problems. 4. An inspection support device as described in appendix 2 or 3.

[0088] (Appendix 5) The comparison means performs the comparison based on a plurality of attributes and a weight for each of the plurality of attributes. An inspection support device according to any one of appendices 1 to 4.

[0089] (Appendix 6) Comparing the attributes of the inspected object with the attributes of past inspected objects in the inspection history; generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the result of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection target in the inspection history; outputting the inspection items; Inspection support methods.

[0090] (Appendix 7) determining a priority for the inspection items based on the results of the comparison; Outputting the inspection items in a format based on the priority of the inspection items. Inspection support methods described in Appendix 6.

[0091] (Appendix 8) The priority is determined based on the necessity of the inspection items determined based on the attributes and the inspection results of the past inspection targets selected based on the results of the comparison. Inspection support methods described in Appendix 7.

[0092] (Appendix 9) The priority of the inspection items that had problems in the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison is determined to be higher than the priority of the inspection items that had no problems. The inspection support method described in Appendix 7 or 8.

[0093] (Appendix 10) making the comparison based on a plurality of attributes and a weight for each of the plurality of attributes; 10. An inspection support method according to any one of appendices 6 to 9.

[0094] (Appendix 11) a comparison process for comparing the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history; a generation process for generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target based on the result of the comparison and the inspection results of the past inspection target in the inspection history; an output process for outputting the inspection items; A program that causes a computer to execute the following.

[0095] (Appendix 12) a decision process for determining the priority of the inspection items based on the results of the comparison; on the computer, The output process outputs the inspection items in a format based on the priority of the inspection items. 12. The program described in Appendix 11.

[0096] (Appendix 13) The determination process determines the priority based on the necessity of the inspection items determined based on the attributes and the inspection results of the past inspection targets selected based on the results of the comparison. 12. The program described in Appendix 12.

[0097] (Appendix 14) The determination process determines the priority of an inspection item that had a problem in the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison so as to be higher than the priority of an inspection item that had no problem. 14. The program according to claim 12 or 13.

[0098] (Appendix 15) The comparison process is performed based on a plurality of attributes and a weight of each of the plurality of attributes. 15. A program according to any one of appendices 11 to 14.

[0099] Although the present disclosure has been described above with reference to the embodiments, the present disclosure is not limited to the above embodiments. Various modifications that can be understood by those skilled in the art can be made to the configuration and details of the present disclosure within the scope of the present disclosure. [Explanation of symbols]

[0100] 1. Inspection Support System 10 Inspection Support Equipment 100 Inspection support equipment 110 Reception 120 Comparison Section 130 Generation part 140 Output section 150 Decision Section 160 Target information storage unit 170 Item information storage section 200 Terminal Device 1000 computers 1001 processor 1002 memory 1003 Storage device 1004 I / O interface 1005 Storage medium

Claims

1. a comparison means for comparing the attributes of the inspection target with the attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history; a generation means for selecting the past inspection target having the attribute whose proximity to the attribute of the inspection target is closer than a predetermined standard, and generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target, including inspection items requiring caution which are inspection items that were problematic in the inspection results of the inspection history of the selected past inspection target, and inspection items that are not inspection items requiring caution; a determining means for determining the priority of the inspection items so that the priority of the individual problem inspection items, which are inspection items for which the number of inspections for which the judgment result is a value indicating the presence of a problem satisfies a predetermined standard in inspections conducted on the inspection target and inspection targets similar to the inspection target, is higher than the priority of the inspection items that are not the individual problem inspection items; an output means for outputting the inspection items that are the inspection items requiring careful inspection and the inspection items that are not the inspection items requiring careful inspection in different formats based on the priority of the inspection items; Equipped with The inspection target is a building that is subject to inspection by the fire department, The attributes include any one of the site area, the total floor area, and the use classification. Inspection support equipment.

2. The inspection support device described in Claim 1, wherein the determination means determines the priority of the inspection item based on the result of the comparison.

3. The determining means determines the priority based on the necessity of the inspection item determined based on the attribute and the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison.

3. The inspection support device according to claim 1 or 2.

4. The determining means determines the priority of the inspection item that had a problem in the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison so as to be higher than the priority of the inspection item that had no problem. The inspection support device according to any one of claims 1 to 3.

5. The comparison means performs the comparison based on a plurality of attributes and a weight of each of the plurality of attributes. The inspection support device according to any one of claims 1 to 4.

6. Comparing the attributes of the inspected object with the attributes of past inspected objects in the inspection history; Selecting the past inspection target having the attribute that is closer to the attribute of the inspection target than a predetermined standard, and generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target, including inspection items requiring caution that are inspection items that had problems in the inspection results of the inspection history of the selected past inspection target, and inspection items that are not inspection items requiring caution; Determine the priority of the inspection items so that the priority of the individual problem inspection items, which are inspection items for which the number of inspections for which the judgment result is a value indicating the presence of a problem satisfies a predetermined standard in inspections conducted on the inspection target and inspection targets similar to the inspection target, is higher than the priority of the inspection items that are not the individual problem inspection items; outputting the inspection items that are the inspection items requiring attention and the inspection items that are not the inspection items requiring attention in different formats based on the priority of the inspection items; The inspection target is a building that is subject to inspection by the fire department, The attributes include any one of the site area, the total floor area, and the use classification. Inspection support methods.

7. determining the priority of the inspection items based on the results of the comparison; The inspection support method according to claim 6.

8. The priority is determined based on the necessity of the inspection items determined based on the attributes and the inspection results of the past inspection targets selected based on the results of the comparison. The inspection support method according to claim 6 or 7.

9. The priority of the inspection item that had a problem in the inspection results of the past inspection target selected based on the result of the comparison is determined to be higher than the priority of the inspection item that had no problem. The inspection support method according to any one of claims 6 to 8.

10. a comparison process for comparing the attributes of the inspection target with attributes of past inspection targets in the inspection history; a generation process for selecting the past inspection target having the attribute whose proximity to the attribute of the inspection target is closer than a predetermined standard, and generating inspection items for the inspection of the inspection target, including inspection items requiring caution that are inspection items that were problematic in the inspection results of the inspection history of the selected past inspection target, and inspection items that are not inspection items requiring caution; a determination process for determining the priority of the inspection items so that the priority of the individual problematic inspection items, which are inspection items for which the number of inspections that have been conducted on the inspection target and similar inspection targets of the inspection target and for which the judgment result is a value indicating the presence of a problem meets a predetermined standard, is higher than the priority of the inspection items that are not the individual problematic inspection items; an output process for outputting the inspection items that are the inspection items requiring careful inspection and the inspection items that are not the inspection items requiring careful inspection in different formats based on the priority of the inspection items; on the computer, The inspection target is a building that is subject to inspection by the fire department, The attributes include any one of the site area, the total floor area, and the use classification. program.

Images