IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/risrel/v239y2025i4p736-753.html

Integrating an incident dataset with a question and answering language model to assist hazard identification: Comparison of an extractive and generative model

Author

Listed:
  • Jon Ricketts
  • Weisi Guo
  • Jonathan Pelham
  • David Barry

Abstract

Robust hazard identification (HAZID) relies upon extensive knowledge of the system being analysed, the technical aspects, and how it will be used operationally. Typically, this knowledge is held by human participants who can draw out answers in natural language to hazard related questions based upon their own experience. However, several threats exist to this, such as high staff turnover, a poor learning from incidents capability or even insufficient Information Technology resources. Alternatively, incident databases hold vast amounts of hazard information that can be transformed into a source of knowledge. As mitigation to the aforementioned issues, this paper presents a Question and Answering (Q&A) Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) language model trained upon aviation incidents and a unique Q&A dataset. The model can extract answers to typical HAZID questions, based upon factual incident reports. Alongside this extractive approach, the paper also explores the use of a generative Large Language Model combined with an incident dataset. Both models proved a useful addition to HAZID activities based upon the Structured What If Technique (SWIFT), answering safety-themed questions based upon a retrieved context of incident reports that semantically matched the query. For the purposes of HAZID, it was suggested that the generative option is preferable based upon its ease of implementation, lower resource requirements and quality of responses. Additionally, it is shown that it is possible for organisations to train and create their own custom models for HAZID purposes. Future work may wish to consider the application of models that can hypothesize scenarios based upon incident reports, building further understanding to the relationships between causes, hazards and consequences.

Suggested Citation

  • Jon Ricketts & Weisi Guo & Jonathan Pelham & David Barry, 2025. "Integrating an incident dataset with a question and answering language model to assist hazard identification: Comparison of an extractive and generative model," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 239(4), pages 736-753, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:risrel:v:239:y:2025:i:4:p:736-753
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X241272831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1748006X241272831
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X241272831?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. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Practical implications of the new risk perspectives," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 136-145.
    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. Hyungju Kim & Mary Ann Lundteigen & Andreas Hafver & Frank Børre Pedersen, 2021. "Utilization of risk priority number to systems-theoretic process analysis: A practical solution to manage a large number of unsafe control actions and loss scenarios," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 235(1), pages 92-107, February.
    2. Charles Sabel & Gary Herrigel & Peer Hull Kristensen, 2018. "Regulation under uncertainty: The coevolution of industry and regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 371-394, September.
    3. Bjørnsen, Kjartan & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås & Aven, Terje, 2019. "A semi-quantitative assessment process for improved use of the expected value of information measure in safety management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 494-502.
    4. Amro Nasr & Oskar Larsson Ivanov & Ivar Björnsson & Jonas Johansson & Dániel Honfi, 2021. "Towards a Conceptual Framework for Built Infrastructure Design in an Uncertain Climate: Challenges and Research Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    6. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    7. Aven, Terje, 2013. "Probabilities and background knowledge as a tool to reflect uncertainties in relation to intentional acts," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 229-234.
    8. Aven, Terje, 2020. "Three influential risk foundation papers from the 80s and 90s: Are they still state-of-the-art?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    9. Berner, Christine Louise & Flage, Roger, 2017. "Creating risk management strategies based on uncertain assumptions and aspects from assumption-based planning," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 10-19.
    10. 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.
    11. Inger Lise Johansen & Marvin Rausand, 2014. "Defining complexity for risk assessment of sociotechnical systems: A conceptual framework," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 228(3), pages 272-290, June.
    12. Goerlandt, Floris & Montewka, Jakub, 2015. "Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 115-134.
    13. Goerlandt, Floris & Islam, Samsul, 2021. "A Bayesian Network risk model for estimating coastal maritime transportation delays following an earthquake in British Columbia," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    14. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Langdalen, Henrik & Dahl, Roy Endre & Bansal, Surbhi & Abrahamsen, Håkon Bjorheim, 2021. "On the use of the ‘Return Of Safety Investments’ (ROSI) measure for decision-making in the chemical processing industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    15. Terje Aven, 2014. "The substitution principle in chemical regulation: a constructive critique, by Ragnar Löfstedt," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 569-571, May.
    16. Thomas Ying‐Jeh Chen & Valerie Nicole Washington & Terje Aven & Seth David Guikema, 2020. "Review and Evaluation of the J100‐10 Risk and Resilience Management Standard for Water and Wastewater Systems," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 608-623, March.
    17. Aven, Terje, 2017. "Improving risk characterisations in practical situations by highlighting knowledge aspects, with applications to risk matrices," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 42-48.
    18. Alises, Ana & Molina, Rafael & Gómez, Rebeca & Pery, Pascual & Castillo, Carmen, 2014. "Overtopping hazards to port activities: Application of a new methodology to risk management (POrt Risk MAnagement Tool)," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 8-20.
    19. Bolbot, Victor & Bergström, Martin & Rahikainen, Marko & Valdez Banda, Osiris A., 2025. "Investigation into safety acceptance principles for autonomous ships," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 257(PA).
    20. Andrzej Magruk, 2020. "Uncertainties, Knowledge, and Futures in Foresight Studies — A Case of the Industry 4.0," Foresight and STI Governance, National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 14(4), pages 20-33.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:239:y:2025:i:4:p:736-753. 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.