Constructing Neural Network Model to Evaluate and Predict Human Error Probability in Nuclear Power Plants Based on Eye Response, Workload Rating, and Situation Awareness

References

• B. KIRWAN, “Human Error Identification in Human Reliability Assessment. Part 1: Overview of Approaches,” Appl. Ergon., 23, 299 (1992); https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(92)90292-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. V. R. CARVALHO, I. L. D. SANTOS, and M. C. R. VIDAL, “Safety Implications of Culture and Cognitive Issues in Nuclear Power Plant Operation,” Appl. Ergon., 37, 211 (2006); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2005.03.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. XUHONG and H. RUIXIANG, Human Reliability Analysis: Theory, Methods and Applications in Industrial System, p. 4, Qing Hua University Press, Beijing (2007) (in Chinese).
   Google Scholar
• X. H. HE and X. R. HUANG, Human Reliability Analysis in Industrial Systems: Principles, Methods and Applications, Tsinghua University Press, Beijing (2007) (in Chinese).
   Google Scholar
• R. E. HALL, J. FRAGOLA, and J. WREATHALL, Post Event Human Decision Errors: Operator Action Tree/time Reliability Correlation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, District of Columbia (1982).
   Google Scholar
• J. C. WILLIAMS, “A Data-Based Method for Assessing and Reducing Human Error to Improve Operational Performance.” presented at the IEEE 4th Human Factor and Power Plants Conf., Monterey, California June 5–9, 1988) (CD-ROM).
   Google Scholar
• D. E. EMBREY, “MAUD SLIM: An Approach to Assessing Human Error Probabilities Using Structured Expert Judgment,” NUREGPCR23518, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1984).
   Google Scholar
• D. I. GERTMAN and H. S. BLACKMAN, Human Reliability and Safety Analysis Data Handbook, Wiley2 Interscience Press, New York (1994).
   Google Scholar
• E. HOLLNAGEL, CREAM—Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method, Elsevier, Amsterdam (1998).
   Google Scholar
• J. FORESTER et al., “ATHEANA User’s Guide,” NUREG-1880, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2000).
   Google Scholar
• K. LOER et al., Learning from Maritime Accidents by Applying Connectionism Assessment of Human Reliability, Ergoship, Sweden (2011).
   Google Scholar
• P. C. LI et al., “Effects of Digital Human-Machine Interface Characteristics on Human Error in Nuclear Power Plants,” Nucl. Power Eng., 32, 48 (2011) (in Chinese).
   Google Scholar
• J. M. O’HARA et al., “The Effects of Interface Management Tasks on Crew Performance and Safety in Complex, Computer-Based Systems: Detailed Analysis,” NUREG/CR-6690, Vol. 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2002).
   Google Scholar
• L. ZHANG, D. X. YANG, and Y. Q. WANG, “Study on the Effect of Information Display on Human Reliability in Digital Control Room,” China Saf. Sci. J., 20, 9, 81 (2010) (in Chinese).
   Google Scholar
• J. M. O’HARA et al., “Computer-Based Procedure Systems: Technical Basis and Human Factors Review Guidance,” NUREG/CR-6634, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2000).
   Google Scholar
• F. H. HUANG and S. L. HWANG, “Experimental Studies of Computerized Procedures and Team Size in Nuclear Power Plant Operations,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 239, 2, 373 (2009); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2008.10.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. YAN et al., “Effect of User Interface Layout on the Operators’ Mental Workload in Emergency Operating Procedures in Nuclear Power Plants,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 322, 266 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2017.07.012.
   Google Scholar
• S. YAN et al., “Driver’s Mental Workload Prediction Model Based on Physiological Indices,” Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon., 25, 3, 476 (Sep. 2019); https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2017.1368951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. C. LI et al., “Study on Operator’s SA Reliability in Digital NPPs. Part 1: The Analysis Method of Operator’s Errors of Situation Awareness,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 102, 168 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.12.011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “Glossary of Risk-Related Terms in Support of Risk Informed Decisionmaking,” NUREG-2122, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2013).
   Google Scholar
• A. R. KIM et al., “Quantification of Performance Shaping Factors (PSFs)’ Weightings for Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) of Low Power and Shutdown (LPSD) Operations,” Ann. Nucl. Energy, 101(MAR), 375 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.11.009.
   Google Scholar
• S. RUBIO et al., “Evaluation of Subjective Mental Workload: A Comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX, and Workload Profile Methods,” Appl. Psychol., 53, 1, 61 (2004); https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00161.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. NADERPOUR, J. LU, and G. ZHANG, “A Safety-Critical Decision Support System Evaluation Using Situation Awareness and Workload Measures,” Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 150, 147 (2016).
   Google Scholar
• V. N. DANG, “Modeling Operator Cognition for Accident Sequence Analysis: Development of an Operator-Plant Simulation,” Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (1996).
   Google Scholar
• P. A. GONZALEZ and J. M. ZAMARRENO, “Prediction of Hourly Energy Consumption in Buildings Based on a Feedback Artificial Neural Network,” Energy Build., 37, 595 (2005); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2004.09.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. ABRAHAM and B. NATH, “A Neuro-Fuzzy Approach for Modelling Electricity Demand in Victoria,” Appl. Soft Comput., 1, 2, 127 (2001); https://doi.org/10.1016/S1568-4946(01)00013-8.
   Google Scholar
• M. R. BECK, M. C. LOHRENZ, and J. G. TRAFTON, “Measuring Search Efficiency in Complex Visual Search Tasks: Global and Local Clutter,” J. Exp. Psychol.: Appl., 16, 3, 238 (2010); https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. YAN, Y. WEI, and C. C. TRAN, “Evaluation and Prediction Mental Workload in User Interface of Maritime Operations Using Eye Response,” Int. J. Ind. Ergon., 71, 117 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.03.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar