Evidential reasoning and machine learning-based framework for assessment and prediction of human error factors-induced fire incidents

被引:12
作者
Ouache, R. [1 ]
Bakhtavar, E. [1 ,2 ]
Hu, G. [1 ]
Hewage, K. [1 ]
Sadiq, R. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Sch Engn, Okanagan Campus,3333 Univ Way, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada
[2] Urmia Univ Technol, Fac Environm, Orumiyeh 5716693188, Iran
来源
JOURNAL OF BUILDING ENGINEERING | 2022年 / 49卷
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Fire risk assessment; Human error factors; Multi-unit residential buildings; Benchmarking analysis; Evidential reasoning; Machine learning; DECISION-ANALYSIS; RISK-ASSESSMENT; PROCESS SYSTEMS; HUMAN-BEHAVIOR; SAFETY; RELIABILITY; PERFORMANCE; MANAGEMENT; BUILDINGS; NETWORKS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104000
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
More than 55% of recorded fire incidents in multi-unit residential buildings (MURBs) are induced by human error factors causing threats to the public and tremendous economic losses. This study developed a framework to quantitatively assess and predict human error factors that induce fire incidents (HEFs-FIs). The framework is based on four main steps: (i) identified the potential HEFsFIs in MURBs and determined their relative frequencies; (ii) developed benchmarks to evaluate the HEFs-FIs in several cities; (iii) assessed the contribution of HEFs-FIs to the regional fire incidents using evidential reasoning; and (iv) developed artificial neural networks (ANN) and classification models to predict HEFs-FIs and fire origin. The developed framework is applied to seven cities of British Columbia, Canada, to show its applicability. Twenty-eight human error factors are found to induce fire incidents in MURBs. The most critical HEFs-FIs are determined for each city using the developed benchmarks. The evidential reasoning results discovered that 20.68% of the HEFs-FIs are very high-risk, including incendiary fire and smokers' materials. An ANN model is found to be very strongly correlated with a correlation coefficient of 82% in predicting HEFs-FIs and their origin location. Moreover, the ANN model is found to outperform the classifiers. The results help decision-makers take actions accordingly to enhance fire prevention and protection strategies.
引用
收藏
页数:27
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]   Dynamic failure analysis of process systems using neural networks [J].
Adedigba, Sunday A. ;
Khan, Faisal ;
Yang, Ming .
PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 2017, 111 :529-543
[2]  
Alexandridis, 2018, FITTING DATA PROBABI
[3]   A comparative study assessing factors that influence home fire casualties and fatalities using state fire incident data [J].
Anderson, Austin ;
Ezekoye, Ofodike A. .
JOURNAL OF FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERING, 2013, 23 (01) :51-75
[4]   The role of people and human factors in performing process hazard analysis and layers of protection analysis [J].
Baybutt, Paul .
JOURNAL OF LOSS PREVENTION IN THE PROCESS INDUSTRIES, 2013, 26 (06) :1352-1365
[5]  
Beck VR, 1991, FIRE SAF SCI, P45, DOI DOI 10.3801/IAFSS.FSS.3-45
[6]  
Bedford T., 2001, PROBABILISTIC RISK A
[7]  
Building Code of Australia, 2007, ESS SAF MEAS MAINT M
[8]  
Canadian Wood Council, 1996, FIR SAF DES BUILD
[9]  
Characteristics of classifier types, 2020, THE MATHWORKS
[10]  
Chen Z., 2015, USE EVIDENTIAL REASO, V2018, P1, DOI [10.1371/journal. pone.0197125, DOI 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0197125]