351 monitors equipment proximity under dynamic mining conditions. The prioritized alerts were integrated into a safety monitoring dashboard, enabling near real-time visualization and review by dispatch and safety personnel and supporting more structured safety analysis and operational decision-making. To evaluate the consistency of the prioritization approach, a CAS safety specialist reviewed the operational context of each interaction and performed a binary classification indicating whether the event represented a high-priority safety situation (positive class) or a routine interaction requiring no further attention (negative class). The specialist’s assessment was used as the reference, while the output of the fuzzy expert system represented the evaluated result. Based on this comparison, a normalized confusion matrix was constructed, as shown in Table 1. In this matrix, high-severity interactions identified by the expert system were considered positive, while the remaining interactions were considered negative. Table 1 – Normalized confusion matrix (expert system vs. CAS specialist) Positive Expert system Negative Expert system Positive CAS specialist 97.2% 2.8% Negative CAS specialist 9.5% 90.5% These results indicate that the proposed framework is capable of reproducing expert-level interpretation of CAS interaction alerts, supporting consistent prioritization aligned with operational safety practices. As shown in Table 1, the obtained sensitivity (recall) was 97.2%, indicating that the system correctly identifies approximately 97 out of every 100 interactions classified as high risk by the CAS specialist. The system also achieved a precision of 90.5%, meaning that most interactions categorized as high risk by the expert system were also interpreted as high-risk situations by the CAS safety specialist. Overall, the framework demonstrates the ability to translate CAS interaction alerts into contextual risk indicators aligned with expert interpretation across a diverse set of operational scenarios. Some prioritized interactions were reconstructed from CAS operational logs using a dedicated visualization tool, as shown in Figure 5, while Table 2 summarizes their operational context and CAS specialist comments. Figure 5 – Schematic reconstruction of representative high-risk interaction scenarios correctly prioritized by the expert system (true positives).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2