IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v237y2023i2p405-424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing next generation marine risk analysis for ships: Bio-inspiration for building immunity

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolaos P Ventikos
  • Konstantinos Louzis

Abstract

Research on autonomous ships has led to several ideas about how they could be operated in terms of level of automation and human presence. However, all seem to point towards systems that will be more complex due to issues such as the tighter integration with software and the interactions with humans-in-the-loop. These ships will likely be completely different compared to conventional ones, which puts into question the usefulness of our current understanding of risk and how it is managed for ensuring safe operation. By a critical review of the literature, this paper highlights the need for advanced methods that will combine machine learning and simulation for dynamically assessing risk in a life cycle context and effectively transferring acquired operational knowledge back to the design phase. The main objective of this paper is to describe a novel life cycle risk framework for developing algorithms inspired by the biological immune system, which provides lifetime protection from harmful pathogens. This framework can be used to construct machine learning algorithms for dynamic risk monitoring and adaptive risk control that address different types of risk, while enabling faster future response to previously unencountered risks and operational feedback to design through learning. We demonstrate the feasibility of our approach in a specific maritime context with a case study on collision risk identification. Considering the lack of experience for autonomous ships, the benefit of our immune-inspired approach is that it departs from the classic risk scenario concept and that it does not rely on safety performance data for identifying risk factors and training the algorithms. We suggest this framework is particularly suitable for autonomous ships with high levels of autonomy, although applicable to conventional ships as well, as it can contribute to empowering them with risk awareness and the capability to deal with any risk environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolaos P Ventikos & Konstantinos Louzis, 2023. "Developing next generation marine risk analysis for ships: Bio-inspiration for building immunity," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 405-424, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:237:y:2023:i:2:p:405-424
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X221087501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X221087501
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X221087501?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Flage, R. & Aven, T., 2015. "Emerging risk – Conceptual definition and a relation to black swan type of events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 61-67.
    2. Aven, Terje & Krohn, Bodil S., 2014. "A new perspective on how to understand, assess and manage risk and the unforeseen," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-10.
    3. Wróbel, Krzysztof & Montewka, Jakub & Kujala, Pentti, 2017. "Towards the assessment of potential impact of unmanned vessels on maritime transportation safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 155-169.
    4. Bye, Rolf J. & Aalberg, Asbjørn L., 2018. "Maritime navigation accidents and risk indicators: An exploratory statistical analysis using AIS data and accident reports," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 174-186.
    5. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    6. Massimo Andretta, 2014. "Some Considerations on the Definition of Risk Based on Concepts of Systems Theory and Probability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1184-1195, July.
    7. Aven, Terje, 2016. "Ignoring scenarios in risk assessments: Understanding the issue and improving current practice," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 215-220.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    2. Wróbel, Krzysztof & Montewka, Jakub & Kujala, Pentti, 2018. "Towards the development of a system-theoretic model for safety assessment of autonomous merchant vessels," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 209-224.
    3. Wang, Wei & Cammi, Antonio & Di Maio, Francesco & Lorenzi, Stefano & Zio, Enrico, 2018. "A Monte Carlo-based exploration framework for identifying components vulnerable to cyber threats in nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 24-37.
    4. Michael Felix Pacevicius & Marilia Ramos & Davide Roverso & Christian Thun Eriksen & Nicola Paltrinieri, 2022. "Managing Heterogeneous Datasets for Dynamic Risk Analysis of Large-Scale Infrastructures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-40, April.
    5. Turati, Pietro & Pedroni, Nicola & Zio, Enrico, 2017. "Simulation-based exploration of high-dimensional system models for identifying unexpected events," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 317-330.
    6. Silveira, P. & Teixeira, A.P. & Figueira, J.R. & Guedes Soares, C., 2021. "A multicriteria outranking approach for ship collision risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    7. Fan, Cunlong & Montewka, Jakub & Zhang, Di, 2022. "A risk comparison framework for autonomous ships navigation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    8. Xiaoyuan Zhao & Haiwen Yuan & Qing Yu, 2021. "Autonomous Vessels in the Yangtze River: A Study on the Maritime Accidents Using Data-Driven Bayesian Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-17, September.
    9. Yang, Xue & Ramezani, Ramin & Utne, Ingrid Bouwer & Mosleh, Ali & Lader, PÃ¥l Furset, 2020. "Operational limits for aquaculture operations from a risk and safety perspective," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    10. Christoph Werner & Tim Bedford & John Quigley, 2018. "Sequential Refined Partitioning for Probabilistic Dependence Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2683-2702, December.
    11. Yu, Qing & Liu, Kezhong & Chang, Chia-Hsun & Yang, Zaili, 2020. "Realising advanced risk assessment of vessel traffic flows near offshore wind farms," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    12. Torbjørn Bjerga & Terje Aven, 2016. "Some perspectives on risk management: A security case study from the oil and gas industry," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 230(5), pages 512-520, October.
    13. Gil, Mateusz & Kozioł, Paweł & Wróbel, Krzysztof & Montewka, Jakub, 2022. "Know your safety indicator – A determination of merchant vessels Bow Crossing Range based on big data analytics," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    14. Victor Bolbot & Gerasimos Theotokatos & LA Wennersberg & Jerome Faivre & Dracos Vassalos & Evangelos Boulougouris & Ørnulf Jan Rødseth & Pål Andersen & Ann-Sofie Pauwelyn & Antoon Van Coillie, 2023. "A novel risk assessment process: Application to an autonomous inland waterways ship," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 237(2), pages 436-458, April.
    15. Julie Shortridge & Janey Smith Camp, 2019. "Addressing Climate Change as an Emerging Risk to Infrastructure Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 959-967, May.
    16. Wang, Huanxin & Liu, Zhengjiang & Wang, Xinjian & Graham, Tony & Wang, Jin, 2021. "An analysis of factors affecting the severity of marine accidents," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    17. Li, Zhongping & Cui, Lirong & Chen, Jianhui, 2018. "Traffic accident modelling via self-exciting point processes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 312-320.
    18. Utne, Ingrid Bouwer & Rokseth, Børge & Sørensen, Asgeir J. & Vinnem, Jan Erik, 2020. "Towards supervisory risk control of autonomous ships," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    19. Raoni, Rafael & Secchi, Argimiro R., 2019. "Procedures to model and solve probabilistic dynamic system problems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    20. Wenjun Zhang & Yingjun Zhang & Weiliang Qiao, 2022. "Risk Scenario Evaluation for Intelligent Ships by Mapping Hierarchical Holographic Modeling into Risk Filtering, Ranking and Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-18, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:237:y:2023:i:2:p:405-424. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.