See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/336149500

Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Model of Railway Accident Analysis by SPSS

Presentation · October 2019

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22209.92000

CITATIONS READS
0 189

1 author:

Saurav Barua
Daffodil International University
52 PUBLICATIONS   41 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Effectiveness of Geogrid for Protecting Polder in Sundarban Coastal Region View project

Class Lecture Materials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Saurav Barua on 01 October 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Artificial Neural Network (ANN) Model of Railway Accident Analysis by SPSS

Dependent variable: Casualty type

Independent variables: Accident causes, Accident location, Involvement of vehicle of pedestrian and time
of accident.
Method of modeling: Multi-layer perceptron using Artificial Neural Network

Step 1: Description of Variables and dummy variables:

Variables selected for the study of railway accident

Dummy Variable
SL. Variables Type Characteristics variable Title
1 Casualty types 1. Fatal accident 1 AT
2. Non-Fatal accident 2
2 Accident causes 1. Train derailment 1 AC
2. Fire in Train 2
3. Collapsed bridges 3
4.Unprotected level
crossing 4

5.Improper maintenance of
the train tracks
5
3 Accident 1.Midblock 1 AL
Location
2.level crossing 2
3.Near station 3
4 Involvement of 1.Large Vehicle (Bus, IVP
vehicle or Truck) 1
pedestrian
2.Car, Micro Bus 2
3.Train 3
4.NMV 4
5.Pedestrian 5
5 Time of 1.Day time 1 TA
Accident
2.Night time 2

[Date] 1
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Step 2: SPSS data entry:

Data View:

Variable view:

[Date] 2
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Step 3: Data analysis:

Select Multilayer Perceptron

Variable assigning:

[Date] 3
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Partitions:

Architecture:

[Date] 4
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Output parameters:

Then click OK

[Date] 5
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Step 4: Output:

Case Processing Summary

N Percent
Sample Training 209 68.8%
Testing 95 31.3%
Valid 304 100.0%
Excluded 0
Total 304

Network Information
Input Layer Covariates 1 AC
2 AL
3 IVP
4 AT
Number of Units a 4
Rescaling Method for Covariates Standardized
Hidden Layer(s) Number of Hidden Layers 1
Number of Units in Hidden Layer 1a 2
Activation Function Hyperbolic
tangent
Output Layer Dependent Variables 1 FT
Number of Units 2
Activation Function Softmax
Error Function Cross-entropy
a. Excluding the bias unit

[Date] 6
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Model Summary
Training Cross Entropy Error 43.190
Percent Incorrect Predictions 8.1%
Stopping Rule Used 1 consecutive
step(s) with no
decrease in errora
Training Time 0:00:00.06
Testing Cross Entropy Error 14.185
Percent Incorrect Predictions 5.3%
Dependent Variable: FT
a. Error computations are based on the testing sample.

[Date] 7
Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

Parameter Estimates
Predicted
Hidden Layer 1 Output Layer
Predictor H(1:1) H(1:2) [FT=1] [FT=2]
Input Layer (Bias) -2.019 -.152
AC -2.716 -1.062
AL 1.067 -2.155
IVP -.561 .894
AT -.208 1.741
Hidden Layer 1 (Bias) -2.395 1.989
H(1:1) -2.093 2.347
H(1:2) 3.707 -3.225

Classification
Predicted
Sample Observed 1 2 Percent Correct
Training 1 27 17 61.4%
2 0 165 100.0%
Overall Percent 12.9% 87.1% 91.9%
Testing 1 17 5 77.3%
2 0 73 100.0%
Overall Percent 17.9% 82.1% 94.7%
Dependent Variable: FT

Independent Variable
Importance
Normalized
Importance Importance
AC .213 56.0%
AL .380 100.0%
IVP .217 57.1%
AT .191 50.3%

[Date] 8
 Saurav Barua
Assistant Professor,
Daffodil International University

[Date] 9

View publication stats