论文部分内容阅读
通过对自愿报告、强制报告和正常运行安全监测(NOSS)数据的威胁与差错管理(TEM)分析,获得了3类安全信息的威胁、差错和意外状态的分布特征。对比研究发现,强制报告中空中威胁、环境威胁的分布比例(55.46%;16.8%)明显高于自愿报告(32.42%;10.35%)和NOSS(19.26%;11.7%),说明强制报告信息侧重外部威胁与他人错误。自愿报告中“内部威胁-其他管制员”的比例(20.85%)显著高于NOSS(6.91%)和强制报告数据(4.20%),说明自愿报告可有效识别内部协作威胁和认知差错;NOSS对易识别、独立责任的“程序差错-文件”检出率(25%)显著高于自愿报告(2.81%)和强制报告(0%),证实了NOSS信息的客观性,但NOSS对低频度、高危害类差错的检出率显著偏低,说明小样本NOSS信息存在波动性。
Threats, errors and unexpected state distributions of the three types of safety information were obtained through threat and error management (TEM) analysis of voluntary reports, mandatory reports and NOS data. The comparative study found that the proportion of airborne threats and environmental threats in forced reporting was significantly higher than that of voluntary reports (32.42%, 10.35%) and NOSS (19.26%; 11.7%), indicating that mandatory reporting of information focused on the outside Threaten with others wrong. The proportion of voluntary threats in the voluntary reporting system (20.85%) was significantly higher than that of NOSS (6.91%) and mandatory reporting data (4.20%), indicating that voluntary reporting can effectively identify internal cooperative threats and cognitive errors. NOSS has a significantly higher detection rate (25%) than that of voluntary reports (2.81%) and compulsory reports (0%), and confirms the objectivity of NOSS information, but NOSS The detection rate of low-frequency and high-hazard errors is significantly lower, indicating that there is volatility in the small sample NOSS information.