ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Machine Learning Models Using SHapley Additive exPlanation for Fire Risk Assessment Mode and Effects Analysis of Stadiums.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Modeling of Friction in Drawbead Test Through Advanced Machine Learning.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Application of machine learning algorithm for predicting acute malnutrition among under 5 children in east Africa using recent DHS.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Crowd Evacuation in Stadiums Using Fire Alarm Prediction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Action Recognition in Basketball with Inertial Measurement Unit-Supported Vest.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Construction and interpretation of tobacco leaf position discrimination model based on interpretable machine learning.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning methods can establish complex nonlinear relationships between input and response variables for stadium fire risk assessment. However, the output of machine learning models is considered very difficult due to their complex "black box" structure, which hinders their application in stadium fire risk assessment. The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method makes a local approximation to the predictions of any regression or classification model so as to be faithful and interpretable, and assigns significant values (SHAP value) to each input variable for a given prediction. In this study, we designed an indicator attribute threshold interval to classify and quantify different fire risk category data, and then used a random forest model combined with SHAP strategy in order to establish a stadium fire risk assessment model. The main objective is to analyze the impact analysis of each risk characteristic on four different risk assessment models, so as to find the complex nonlinear relationship between risk characteristics and stadium fire risk. This helps managers to be able to make appropriate fire safety management and smart decisions before an incident occurs and in a targeted manner to reduce the incidence of fires. The experimental results show that the established interpretable random forest model provides 83% accuracy, 86% precision, and 85% recall for the stadium fire risk test dataset. The study also shows that the low level of data makes it difficult to identify the range of decision boundaries for Critical mode and Hazardous mode.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.