4.7 Article

AIS-Based Multiple Vessel Collision and Grounding Risk Identification based on Adaptive Safety Domain

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jmse8010005

关键词

AIS; risk identification; maritime navigation accident; multiple vessels; collision risk; grounding risk; spatial risk function; vessel maneuverability; safety domain; decision support

资金

  1. Norwegian Research Council research-based innovation center BigInsight [237718]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The continuous growth in maritime traffic and recent developments towards autonomous navigation have directed increasing attention to navigational safety in which new tools are required to identify real-time risk and complex navigation situations. These tools are of paramount importance to avoid potentially disastrous consequences of accidents and promote safe navigation at sea. In this study, an adaptive ship-safety-domain is proposed with spatial risk functions to identify both collision and grounding risk based on motion and maneuverability conditions for all vessels. The algorithm is designed and validated through extensive amounts of Automatic Identification System (AIS) data for decision support over a large area, while the integration of the algorithm with other navigational systems will increase effectiveness and ensure reliability. Since a successful evacuation of a potential vessel-to-vessel collision, or a vessel grounding situation, is highly dependent on the nearby maneuvering limitations and other possible accident situations, multi-vessel collision and grounding risk is considered in this work to identify real-time risk. The presented algorithm utilizes and exploits dynamic AIS information, vessel registry and high-resolution maps and it is robust to inaccuracies of position, course and speed over ground records. The computation-efficient algorithm allows for real-time situation risk identification at a large-scale monitored map up to country level and up to several years of operation with a very high accuracy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据