arXiv:2501.06490cs.CLcs.LG2025-01被引 17

用AI从事故文本中自动判断飞机损伤等级,准确率超90%。

Sequential Classification of Aviation Safety Occurrences with Natural Language Processing

  • 用LSTM、sRNN等深度学习模型分析航空事故文本
  • 在2.7万条NTSB报告上实现超90%准确率
  • 适合安全分析、AI辅助决策等场景

航空安全至关重要,微小异常可能引发严重后果。事故和事件报告虽能追溯原因并提出建议,但其前因文本多为人工可读的非结构化文字,计算机难以理解。本研究利用自然语言处理与AI模型,分析事故文本以推断飞机损伤等级。在2.7万份来自NTSB的报告上评估了LSTM、BLSTM、GRU、sRNN及其组合模型的分类性能。所有模型表现良好,准确率均超过87.9%(四分类随机猜测为25%),精度、召回率、F1分数分别高于80%、88%、85%。其中sRNN在召回率(90%)和准确率(90%)上略优,LSTM则在精度(87%)上稍佳。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Safety is a critical aspect of the air transport system given even slight operational anomalies can result in serious consequences. To reduce the chances of aviation safety occurrences, accidents and incidents are reported to establish the root cause, propose safety recommendations etc. However, analysis narratives of the pre-accident events are presented using human-understandable, raw, unstructured, text that a computer system cannot understand. The ability to classify and categorise safety occurrences from their textual narratives would help aviation industry stakeholders make informed safety-critical decisions. To classify and categorise safety occurrences, we applied natural language processing (NLP) and AI (Artificial Intelligence) models to process text narratives. The study aimed to answer the question. How well can the damage level caused to the aircraft in a safety occurrence be inferred from the text narrative using natural language processing. The classification performance of various deep learning models including LSTM, BLSTM, GRU, sRNN, and combinations of these models including LSTM and GRU, BLSTM+GRU, sRNN and LSTM, sRNN and BLSTM, sRNN and GRU, sRNN and BLSTM and GRU, and sRNN and LSTM and GRU was evaluated on a set of 27,000 safety occurrence reports from the NTSB. The results of this study indicate that all models investigated performed competitively well recording an accuracy of over 87.9% which is well above the random guess of 25% for a four-class classification problem. Also, the models recorded high precision, recall, and F1 scores above 80%, 88%, and 85%, respectively. sRNN slightly outperformed other single models in terms of recall (90%) and accuracy (90%) while LSTM reported slightly better performance in terms of precision (87%).

自然语言处理航空安全分类模型

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。