基于安全度的机场围界安全评估方法

针对机场围界存在虚警率高、信息分散和难以从全局角度管理等问题,提出基于安全度的机场围界安全评估方法。基于分散环境集中监控思想,利用改进DS证据理论将前端探测设备获取的信息进行融合,再利用模糊集理论获得区段安全度,进而求得防区安全度和全局安全度。基于C#和Map Xtreme开发机场围界监控平台,结果表明,基于安全度的评估方法能够准确反映机场围界安全运行状况。     

完善刑事证人出庭作证制度的探讨

证人作证制度的完善是刑事审判方式改革的迫切需要和必然结果，由于立法和司法上的原因．在我国刑事诉讼中，证人拒不作证或拒不出庭、作伪证及证人证言的反复等现象普遍存在．本文分析目前我国刑事证人不出庭作证制度的原因及危害结果，提出完善我国刑事诉讼证人制度的建议等．     

基于C-OWA算子和证据理论的船舶夜航光环境安全评价

为了更好地保障船舶夜航安全,基于船舶夜航光环境的特殊性和船舶夜航的风险性,构建船舶夜航光环境证据理论评价模型。首先,建立以信号灯误导、眩光干扰、频闪污染、光导致疲劳等4个决策层为基础的船舶夜航光环境评价指标体系;其次,运用C-OWA算子处理专家对指标的决策数据,判断光环境对船舶夜航安全的影响程度;最后,将证据理论模型应用于大连大窑湾港的夜航光环境中。结果表明:该光环境安全性高,对船舶夜航安全的影响小。构建的模型为港口、航道以及其他船舶夜航光环境水域安全评价提供了一定的参考依据。     

基于循证理论的事故隐患排查治理研究

为更好对企业进行事故隐患排查治理,本文从知识可及性和知识转移等角度,分析导致企业隐患排查治理差异的因素;然后提出基于循证理论的企业隐患排查治理方法并进行实证分析。研究表明:将循证理论引入到企业事故隐患排查治理中具有可行性和有效性。     

基于AHP-证据理论的综合管廊火灾安全评价

为了进行综合管廊火灾安全评价,提出了基于AHP-证据理论的评价模型。采用AHP法得出综合管廊火灾安全评价体系中各因素的权重,再引入D-S证据理论提高评价的可信度。从"人、机、环、管"四大方面归纳出影响综合管廊火灾安全的潜在影响因素并分级,建立综合管廊火灾安全评价指标体系;通过AHP法得出体系中各因素的权重,再通过信任函数和似然函数的计算得到量化评价结果;最后将多个评价结果进行融合以提高最终评价结果的可信度,并且评判火灾安全等级。对某综合管廊的实例分析表明,当不同专家给出的评价结果有差异时,依据证据理论将不同的证据进行融合,能有效提高综合管廊火灾安全评价的可信度,最终得到可靠的评价结果。通过分析得出设备因素对综合管廊火灾安全评价体系影响最大。     

Predicting the time needed for environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps

Systematic reviews (SRs) and systematic mapping aim to maximize transparency and comprehensiveness while minimizing subjectivity and bias. These are time-consuming and complex tasks, so SRs are considered resource intensive, but published estimates of systematic-review resource requirements are largely anecdotal. We analyzed all Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) SRs (n = 66) and maps (n = 20) published from 2012 to 2017 to estimate the average number of articles retained at each review stage. We also surveyed 33 experienced systematic reviewers to collate information on the rate at which those stages could be completed. In combination, these data showed that the average CEE SR takes an estimated 164 d (full-time equivalent) (SD 23), and the average CEE systematic map (SM) (excluding critical appraisal) takes 211 d (SD 53). While screening titles and abstracts is widely considered time-consuming, metadata extraction and critical appraisal took as long or longer to complete, especially for SMs. Given information about the planned methods and evidence base, we created a software tool that predicts time requirements of a SR or map with evidence-based defaults as a starting point. Our results shed light on the most time-consuming stages of the SR and mapping processes, will inform review planning, and can direct innovation to streamline processes. Future predictions of effort required to complete SRs and maps could be improved if authors provide more details on methods and results.     

Contribution of Systematic Reviews to Management Decisions

Systematic reviews comprehensively summarize evidence about the effectiveness of conservation interventions. We investigated the contribution to management decisions made by this growing body of literature. We identified 43 systematic reviews of conservation evidence, 23 of which drew some concrete conclusions relevant to management. Most reviews addressed conservation interventions relevant to policy decisions; only 35% considered practical on‐the‐ground management interventions. The majority of reviews covered only a small fraction of the geographic and taxonomic breadth they aimed to address (median = 13% of relevant countries and 16% of relevant taxa). The likelihood that reviews contained at least some implications for management tended to increase as geographic coverage increased and to decline as taxonomic breadth increased. These results suggest the breadth of a systematic review requires careful consideration. Reviews identified a mean of 312 relevant primary studies but excluded 88% of these because of deficiencies in design or a failure to meet other inclusion criteria. Reviews summarized on average 284 data sets and 112 years of research activity, yet the likelihood that their results had at least some implications for management did not increase as the amount of primary research summarized increased. In some cases, conclusions were elusive despite the inclusion of hundreds of data sets and years of cumulative research activity. Systematic reviews are an important part of the conservation decision making tool kit, although we believe the benefits of systematic reviews could be significantly enhanced by increasing the number of reviews focused on questions of direct relevance to on‐the‐ground managers; defining a more focused geographic and taxonomic breadth that better reflects available data; including a broader range of evidence types; and appraising the cost‐effectiveness of interventions. Contribuciones de las Revisiones Sistemáticas a las Decisiones de Manejo     

Standardized reporting of the costs of management interventions for biodiversity conservation

Effective conservation management interventions must combat threats and deliver benefits at costs that can be achieved within limited budgets. Considerable effort has focused on measuring the potential benefits of conservation interventions, but explicit quantification of the financial costs of implementation is rare. Even when costs have been quantified, haphazard and inconsistent reporting means published values are difficult to interpret. This reporting deficiency hinders progress toward a collective understanding of the financial costs of management interventions across projects and thus limits the ability to identify efficient solutions to conservation problems or attract adequate funding. We devised a standardized approach to describing financial costs reported for conservation interventions. The standards call for researchers and practitioners to describe the objective and outcome, context and methods, and scale of costed interventions, and to state which categories of costs are included and the currency and date for reported costs. These standards aim to provide enough contextual information that readers and future users can interpret the cost data appropriately. We suggest these standards be adopted by major conservation organizations, conservation science institutions, and journals so that cost reporting is comparable among studies. This would support shared learning and enhance the ability to identify and perform cost‐effective conservation.     

甲苯二异氰酸酯(TDI)致癌性的综合评估

甲苯二异氰酸酯(TDI)被数家机构分类为可能的人类致癌物,其主要依据为动物实验发现对啮齿动物经灌胃暴露TDI后肿瘤发生率升高。基于研究结果的可靠性以及一致性,综合评估了现有研究数据是否支持这一分类。结果显示现有的流行病学数据不足以有力证明TDI为人类致癌物。动物实验研究表明,吸入接触TDI并不导致肿瘤发生。经灌胃暴露后观察到的肿瘤很可能是由于TDI转化为已知的啮齿动物致癌物甲苯二胺(TDA)所致。在TDI吸入暴露的体内实验中,当由TDI转化生成的TDA不能达到具有显著生物学效应的浓度时,TDI对啮齿动物或人类都没有遗传毒性。由于哺乳动物在生理性接触条件下TDI不能转变成TDA,所以对人类而言,TDI接触与致癌效应之间无直接的显著因果关系。因此虽然在如灌胃等非生理暴露的条件下,TDI可能的人类致癌物的分类是正确的,但本文对其致癌研究数据的合理评估和正确理解有助于将产品监管力度集中于与职业暴露更相关的有害健康效应上。     

Bridging research and practice in conservation

Calls for biodiversity conservation practice to be more evidence based are growing, and we agree evidence use in conservation practice needs improvement. However, evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. In medicine, unlike in conservation, a well-established and well-funded layer of intermediary individuals and organizations engage with medical practitioners, synthesize primary research relevant to decision making, and make evidence easily accessible. These intermediaries prepare targeted evidence summaries and distribute them to practitioners faced with time-sensitive and value-laden decisions. To be effective, these intermediaries, who we refer to as evidence bridges, should identify research topics based on the priorities of practitioners; synthesize evidence; prepare and distribute easy-to-find and easy-to-use evidence summaries; and develop and maintain networks of connections with researchers and practitioners. Based on a review of the literature regarding evidence intermediaries in conservation and environmental management, as well as an anonymous questionnaire searching for such organizations, we found few intermediaries that met all these criteria. Few evidence bridges that do exist are unable to reach most conservation practitioners, which include resource managers in government and industry, conservation organizations, and farmers and other private landowners. We argue that the lack of evidence bridges from research to practitioners contributes to evidence complacency and limits the use of evidence in conservation action. Nevertheless, several existing organizations help reduce the gap between evidence and practice and could serve as a foundation for building additional components of evidence bridges in conservation. Although evidence bridges need expertise in research and evidence synthesis, they also require expertise in identifying and communicating with the community of practitioners most in need of clear and concise syntheses of evidence. Article Impact Statement: Evidence-based conservation will not be realized without improved access to evidence. We call for intermediary evidence bridges.