Identification of critical factors in chemical accidents based on text mining and improved DEMATEL method

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.03.0230

Abstract

Abstract:

To draw lessons from historical chemical accidents and guide the practice of chemical safety production management, a method for identifying critical factors in chemical accidents based on text mining and improved DEMATEL method was proposed. Firstly, text mining technology was used to fully mine the text information of 1 627 chemical accident investigation reports, based on which 14 chemical accident influencing factors were extracted according to related literature, laws and regulations. Then, the fuzzy DEMATEL method based on alpha-level sets was used to calculate the performance levels of the factors affecting chemical accidents. Finally, the correlations between critical factors and other factors were analyzed and the mechanism of chemical accidents was revealed. The results show that 8 chemical accident influencing factors are identified as the critical factors, i.e., extreme weather, regulations, technical procedures, hidden danger investigation, risk control, education and training, supervision and management, and operation management. These 8 critical factors have direct impact on the influence factors such as facilities and equipment, material reactions, occupational quality, job responsibilities, emergency management, and safety investment, which eventually lead to chemical accidents.

Key words: text mining, decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory(DEMATEL), chemical accident, critical factors identification, alpha-level sets

CLC Number:

X928事故调查与分析(工伤事故分析与预防)

WANG Liang, LAI Jiayan, ZHANG Zixin, WANG Yingming. Identification of critical factors in chemical accidents based on text mining and improved DEMATEL method[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(3): 20-28.

Figures/Tables 11

Tab.1

Fig.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

TextRank-based initial factors mining for chemical accidents

关键词	事故初始因素及编号	关键词	事故初始因素及编号
可燃气体、泄漏	可燃气体泄漏A₁	违反、操作规程	违反操作规程A₂₆
设备、损坏	设备损坏A₂	危险性	危险性认识不足A₂₇
培训	未经岗前培训A₃	安全生产教育培训	安全生产教育培训不到位A₂₈
设备、腐蚀	设备腐蚀严重A₄	防范措施	未采取有效防范措施A₂₉
焊缝	焊缝开裂A₅	编制、应急预案	未编制应急预案A₃₀
安全管理人员	未配备安全管理人员A₆	高温天气	高温天气A₃₁
危险源辨识	危险源辨识不足A₇	隐患排查治理	隐患排查治理不彻底A₃₂
审批	审批把关不严A₈	爆炸性、混合气体	形成爆炸性混合气体A₃₃
疏散	未及时疏散A₉	设备、故障	设备带故障运行A₃₄
无证	无证上岗A₁₀	打非、治违	“打非治违”工作不到位A₃₅
冒险作业	强令冒险作业A₁₁	生产工艺、不合理	生产工艺不合理A₃₆
盲目	盲目操作A₁₂	改变、生产工艺	擅自改变生产工艺A₃₇
违章冒险作业	违章冒险作业A₁₃	操作规程	操作规程不完善A₃₈
行政处罚	行政处罚不落实A₁₄	监管、不力	相关部门监管不力A₃₉
非法生产	非法生产A₁₅	应急处置	应急处置能力缺失A₄₀
未及时、处置	未及时处置A₁₆	安全意识、淡薄	安全意识淡薄A₄₁
违章指挥	违章指挥A₁₇	未依法取得	未依法取得相关许可A₄₂
执法	执法不严A₁₈	风险分析	未进行风险分析A₄₃
监护	监护不到位A₁₉	巡查	日常巡查不到位A₄₄
设备、缺陷	设备存在缺陷A₂₀	应急处置	应急处置不当A₄₅
检修	检修工作不到位A₂₁	安全生产责任制	安全生产责任制不落实A₄₆
检维修、能力	检维修能力缺乏A₂₂	安全知识	安全知识缺失A₄₇
应急预案、不完善	应急预案制定不完善A₂₃	储存、危化品	非法储存危化品A₄₈
规章制度	规章制度不健全A₂₄	逃避、监管	蓄意逃避监管A₄₉
擅自、离开	擅自离开岗位A₂₅	监测预警	未安设监测预警系统A₅₀

Tab.4

Tab.5

Influencing factors of chemical safety production accidents

影响因素	事故初始因素	影响因素	事故初始因素
极端天气F₁	高温天气A₃₁	隐患排查F₈	隐患排查治理不彻底A₃₂
	雷电暴雨B₁		日常巡查不到位A₄₄
	台风C₁		排查和整改不到位B₄
	低温天气C₂	风险管控F₉	危险源辨识不足A₇
设施设备F₂	设备损坏A₂		未进行风险分析A₄₃
	设备腐蚀严重A₄		风险研判不到位C₆
	焊缝开裂A₅		管控措施针对性不强C₇
	设备存在缺陷A₂₀	应急管理F₁₀	未及时疏散A₉
	设备带故障运行A₃₄		未及时处置A₁₆
	使用淘汰设备C₃		应急预案制定不完善A₂₃
物料反应F₃	可燃气体泄漏A₁		未采取有效防范措施A₂₉
物料反应F₃	形成爆炸性混合气体A₃₃		未编制应急预案A₃₀
职业素养F₄	未经专门培训A₃		应急处置不当A₄₅
	检维修能力缺乏A₂₂		未配备应急救援器材C₈
	危险性认识不足A₂₇		未定期进行应急救援演练C₉
	应急处置能力缺失A₄₀	教育培训F₁₁	未配备安全管理人员A₆
	安全意识淡薄A₄₁	教育培训F₁₁	安全生产教育培训不到位A₂₈
	安全知识缺失A₄₇	安全投入F₁₂	未安设监测预警系统A₅₀
	安全操作技能缺失B₂		未做好安全技术交底B₅
岗位职责F₅	无证上岗A₁₀		安全装置缺失或失效B₆
	强令冒险作业A₁₁		未提供劳动防护用具B₇
	盲目操作A₁₂		安全生产管理机构缺失C₁₀
	违章冒险作业A₁₃		安全生产资金投入不足C₁₁
	违章指挥A₁₇	监督管理F₁₃	审批把关不严A₈
	监护不到位A₁₉		行政处罚不落实A₁₄
	检修工作不到位A₂₁		执法不严A₁₈
	擅自离开岗位A₂₅		“打非治违”工作不到位A₃₅
	违反操作规程A₂₆		相关部门监管不力A₃₉
	擅自变更生产工艺A₃₇		法律法规不健全B₈
	疲劳作业B₃		举报奖励制度不健全C₁₂
	违反劳动纪律C₄	经营管理F₁₄	非法生产A₁₅
规章制度F₆	规章制度不健全A₂₄		未依法取得相关许可A₄₂
规章制度F₆	规章制度不落实C₅		安全生产责任制不落实A₄₆
技术规程F₇	生产工艺不合理A₃₆		非法存储危险化学品A₄₈
技术规程F₇	操作规程不完善A₃₈		蓄意逃避监管A₄₉

Tab.5

Tab.6

Tab.7

Tab.8

Comprehensive influence matrix of upper, lower and random values at α=0.1

因素	$T α L$				$T α M$				$T α H$
因素	F₁	F₂	…	F₁₄	F₁	F₂	…	F₁₄	F₁	F₂	…	F₁₄
F₁	0.016	0.137	…	0.059	0.097	0.255	…	0.184	0.240	0.438	…	0.366
F₂	0.014	0.055	…	0.076	0.100	0.174	…	0.190	0.244	0.353	…	0.360
F₃	0.005	0.044	…	0.012	0.073	0.152	…	0.116	0.197	0.316	…	0.273
︙	︙	︙		︙	︙	︙		︙	︙	︙		︙
F₁₂	0.031	0.199	…	0.177	0.144	0.326	…	0.296	0.310	0.518	…	0.478
F₁₃	0.037	0.243	…	0.241	0.161	0.367	…	0.344	0.332	0.555	…	0.513
F₁₄	0.031	0.182	…	0.123	0.147	0.313	…	0.245	0.314	0.508	…	0.428

Tab.8

Tab.9

Critical factors at different α levels

α	$T α L$	$T α M$	$T α H$
0	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.1	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.2	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.3	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.4	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.5	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.6	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.7	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.8	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
0.9	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
1	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄
平均	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄	F₁,F₆,F₇,F₈,F₉,F₁₁,F₁₃,F₁₄

Tab.9

Fig.2

References 13

[1]	张圣柱, 王旭, 魏利军, 等. 2016—2020年全国化工和危险化学品事故分析研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2021, 17(10): 119-126.
	ZHANG Shengzhu, WANG Xu, WEI Lijun, et al. Analysis and research on chemical and hazardous chemicals accidents in China during 2016-2020[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2021, 17(10): 119-126.
[2]	王伟, 刘志云, 崔福庆, 等. 1981—2020年我国较大及以上危化品事故统计分析与对策研究[J]. 应用化工, 2021, 50(8):2187-2193.
	WANG Wei, LIU Zhiyun, CUI Fuqing, et al. Statistical analysis and countermeasures of large and above chemical accidents in China during 1981-2020[J]. Applied Chemical Industry, 2021, 50(8): 2187-2193.
[3]	李娜, 陈建宏. 2013-2019年我国危险化学品统计分析[J]. 应用化工, 2020, 49(5): 1261-1265.
	LI Na, CHEN Jianhong. Statistical analysis of dangerous chemicals in China from 2013 to 2019[J]. Applied Chemical Industry, 2020, 49(5): 1261-1265.
[4]	WANG Bing, LI Dinglin, WU Chao. Characteristics of hazardous chemical accidents during hot season in China from 1989 to 2019: a statistical investigation[J]. Safety Science, 2020, 129:DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104788.
[5]	JING Sifeng, LIU Xiwei, GONG Xiaoyan, et al. Correlation analysis and text classification of chemical accident cases based on word embedding[J]. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2022, 158: 698-710. doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2021.12.038
[6]	牛毅, 樊运晓, 高远. 基于数据挖掘的化工生产事故致因主题抽取[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2019, 15(10): 165-170.
	NIU Yi, FAN Yunxiao, GAO Yuan. Topic extraction on causes of chemical production accidents based on data mining[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2019, 15(10): 165-170.
[7]	李鑫, 阳富强. 危化品事故人为因素关联规则挖掘与分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(11): 134-139. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.11.2387
	LI Xin, YANG Fuqiang. Human factor association rules mining and analysis for hazardous chemical accidents[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(11): 134-139. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.11.2387
[8]	吴林海, 张秋琴, 山丽杰, 等. 影响企业食品添加剂使用行为关键因素的识别研究:基于模糊集理论的DEMATEL方法[J]. 系统工程, 2012, 30(7): 48-54.
	WU Linhai, ZHANG Qiuqin, SHAN Lijie, et al. Study on identifying critical factors of using behavior of food additives in enterprises: a fuzzy DEMATEL method[J]. Systems Engineering, 2012, 30(7):48-54.
[9]	MIHALCEA R, TARAU P. TextRank: bringing order into text[C]. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2004: 404-411.
[10]	BRIN S, PAGE L. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine[J]. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 1998, 30(1): 107-117. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X
[11]	ZHANG Zixin, WANG Liang, WANG Yingming, et al. A novel alpha-level sets based fuzzy DEMATEL method considering experts' hesitant information[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2023, 213:DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118925.
[12]	十三届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十九次会议. 中华人民共和国安全生产法(修正)[L]. 2021-06-10.
[13]	WANG Yingming. Centroid defuzzification and the maximizing set and minimizing set ranking based on alpha level sets[J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2009, 57(1): 228-236. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2008.11.014

模糊信息	三角模糊数
很高(VH)	(0.75,1.0,1.0)
高(H)	(0.5,0.75,1.0)
低(L)	(0.25,0.5,0.75)
很低(VL)	(0,0.25,0.5)
无(No)	(0.0,0.0,0.25)

因素	F₁	F₂	F₃	F₄	F₅	F₆	F₇	F₈	F₉	F₁₀	F₁₁	F₁₂	F₁₃	F₁₄
F₁	No	H	H	VL	L	VL	VL	L	H	VH	VL	H	VL	VL
F₂	VL	No	VH	VL	VL	VL	L	L	L	L	L	L	VL	L
F₃	VL	L	No	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL	VL
F₄	VL	H	VL	No	VH	L	VL	H	H	VH	L	L	VL	L
F₅	VL	H	H	VH	No	L	L	L	H	L	VL	H	VL	H
F₆	VL	H	L	H	VH	No	L	H	H	H	VH	H	VL	VH
F₇	VL	VH	VH	H	VH	L	No	H	H	L	L	L	VL	VL
F₈	L	VH	H	L	L	H	VH	No	H	H	L	VH	L	H
F₉	L	VH	VH	L	H	H	H	VH	No	VH	L	VH	VL	H
F₁₀	L	H	L	L	L	H	L	L	H	No	VH	H	VL	L
F₁₁	VL	VL	L	VH	VH	H	H	H	H	VH	No	VH	VL	VH
F₁₂	VL	H	H	H	VH	L	L	VH	H	H	VH	No	VL	H
F₁₃	VL	H	L	H	VH	VH	VH	VH	VH	H	H	VH	No	VH
F₁₄	VL	L	L	VH	VH	H	L	H	VH	H	L	VH	H	No

因素	F₁	F₂	F₃	…	F₁₂	F₁₃	F₁₄
F₁	[0,0.225]	[0.525,0.975]	[0.525,0.975]	…	[0.525,0.975]	[0.025,0.475]	[0.025,0.475]
F₂	[0.025,0.475]	[0,0.225]	[0.775,1]	…	[0.275,0.725]	[0.025,0.475]	[0.275,0.725]
F₃	[0.025,0.475]	[0.275,0.725]	[0,0.225]	…	[0.025,0.475]	[0.025,0.475]	[0.025,0.475]
︙	︙	︙	︙		︙	︙	︙
F₁₂	[0.025,0.475]	[0.525,0.975]	[0.525,0.975]	…	[0,0.225]	[0.025,0.475]	[0.525,0.975]
F₁₃	[0.025,0.475]	[0.525,0.975]	[0.275,0.725]	…	[0.775,1]	[0,0.225]	[0.775,1]
F₁₄	[0.025,0.475]	[0.275,0.725]	[0.275,0.725]	…	[0.775,1]	[0.525,0.975]	[0,0.225]