ArticleScientific reports2026
Machine learning model for multi-factor risk prediction in airport construction under non-stop operations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Airport construction under non-stop operations presents unique safety challenges due to complex multi-factor interactions that traditional qualitative methods cannot adequately address. To address this, a study was conducted on 412 construction events (comprising 103 risk incidents and 309 routine events) at a major international hub airport between 2019 and 2024. First, a risk factor system encompassing six key categories, including personnel, environment, equipment, management, facilities, and operations, was developed, represented by 42 indicator variables. To address class imbalance, the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE) was applied. Subsequently, the XGBoost classifier was trained, achieving an accuracy of 92.7%, an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.875, and a recall rate of 85.7%. For model interpretability, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values were utilized to quantify feature contributions and elucidate the risk transmission mechanism. Five core risk factors were identified: flight density, visibility, the timeliness of NOTAM release, peak hours, and the experience of construction personnel. Key thresholds were determined: flight density of 35 flights per hour, visibility of 3 km, and a 2-h delay in NOTAM release. SHAP analysis evaluated the synergy of operational pressure variables. These findings provide a foundation for integration into operational risk warning systems, supporting differentiated risk management and offering a data-driven approach to balancing efficiency with construction safety.
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.