Restrictions on Application of Causal Modeling Methods in Forensic Mining and Technical Examination and Ways to their Overcoming
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32353/khrife.2.2026.09Keywords:
forensic mining and technical examination; causal relationship; causal analysis; phase-module decomposition; mining accident; expert conclusion; criminal proceedings.Abstract
Scientific issue of methodological gap between modern causal models of analysis of complex accidents and the procedural requirements of forensic mining and technical examination, within the limits of which forensic expert is obliged to rely only on the materials provided, his competence and substantiation procedures that are subject to verification is outlined. The research purpose is to substantiate the limits of application of modern foreign models of causal analysis in national forensic mining and technical examination and to develop phase-modular decomposition as a compensatory procedural and methodological mechanism for the reconstruction of complex accidents. The research methods include theoretical analysis of Ukrainian and foreign sources, normative and procedural interpretation of the role and boundaries of the competence of a forensic expert, logical and structural modeling of causal relationships, phase-modular decomposition of an accident and practical testing of the approach on two impersonal cases from real expert practice. It is shown that STAMP/CAST, SCM, causal graphs, counterfactual and other system models have significant heuristic value, however, their direct transfer to the field of forensic research is limited by the retrospective nature of forensic mining expertise, the scarcity of criminal proceedings materials, the requirements for the reproducibility of the conclusion and the prohibition to compensate for evidentiary gaps with probable assumptions. It is proven that phase-modular decomposition makes it possible to localize causality in technically homogeneous fragments of the event, establish an evidentiary basis for each module, procedurally correctly respond to the lack of initial data and form a logical, transparent expert conclusion. The suitability of the approach for analyzing events in open-pit and underground mining operations is confirmed by practical testing.
References
Bongers, S., Forré, P., Peters, J., Mooij, J. M. (2021). Foundations of structural causal models with cycles and latent variables. The Annals of Statistics. Vol. 49. Is. 5. DOI: 10.1214/21-aos2064.
Ceylan, B. O., Karatuğ, Ç., Akyuz, E., et al. (2023). A system theory (STAMP) based quantitative accident analysis model for complex engineering systems. Safety Science. Vol. 166. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106232.
Cruz-Ausejo, L., Cama-Ttito, N. A., Solano P. F., et al. (2024). Occupational accidents in mining workers: Scoping review of studies published in the last 13 years. BMJ Open. Vol. 14. Is. 10. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080572.
Dong, J., Gao, Z., Liu, T., et al. (2022). Analysis of the Causative Mechanism of Coal Mine Safety Accidents Based on STAMP Model. Journal of Mining Engineering and Safety Technology. Vol. 1. Is. 1. DOI: 10.23977/jmest.2022.020101.
Ebrahimi, H., Zarei, E., Ansari, M., et al. (2024). A system theory-based accident analysis model: STAMP-fuzzy DEMATEL. Safety Science. Vol. 173. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106445.
Fagundes, J. M., Gaya de Figueiredo, M. A., Alberton, A. L., et al. (2022). Analysis of accidents through combination of CAST and TRACEr techniques: A case study. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. Vol. 74. Art. 104639. DOI: 10.1016/j.jlp.2021.104639.
Ge, J., Zhang, Y., Xu, K., et al. (2022). A new accident causation theory based on systems thinking and its systemic accident analysis method of work systems. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. Vol. 158. DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2021.12.036.
Hamim, O. F., Hasanat-E-Rabbi, Sh., Debnath, M., et al. (2022). Taking a mixed-methods approach to collision investigation: AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and PCM. Applied Ergonomics. Apr: 100:103650. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103650.
Hulme, A., Stanton, N. A., Walker, G. H., et al. (2021). Are accident analysis methods fit for purpose? Testing the criterion-referenced concurrent validity of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet. Safety Science. Vol. 144. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105454.
Hulme, A., Stanton, N. A., Walker, G. H., et al. (2024). Testing the reliability of accident analysis methods: A comparison of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet. Ergonomics. Vol. 67. Is. 5. DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2023.2240048.
Long, J. P., Zhu, H., Do, K. A., Ha, M. J. (2023). Estimating causal effects with hidden confounding using instrumental variables and environments. Electronic Journal of Statistics. Vol. 17. Is. 2. DOI: 10.1214/23-ejs2160.
Mitra, N., Roy, J., Small, D. (2022). The Future of Causal Inference. American Journal of Epidemiology. Art. 191(10):1671-1676. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwac108.
Muzyka, A. A., Bahirov, S. R. (2023). Kauzalnist i kryminalnyi zakon v aspekti pravovoho prahmatyzmu : monohrafiia [Causality and criminal law in the aspect of legal pragmatism]. Kyiv. URI: https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/25290 [in Ukrainian].
Nakhal Akel, A. J., Patriarca, R., Tronci, M., et al. (2022). A STAMP Model for Safety Analysis in Industrial Plants. Chemical Engineering Transactions. Vol. 91. DOI: 10.3303/cet2291068.
Naser, M. Z. (2024). Causality and causal inference for engineers: Beyond correlation, regression, prediction and artificial intelligence. WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Vol. 14. Is. 4. DOI: 10.1002/widm.1533.
Naser, M. Z., Teymori Gharah Tapeh, A. (2023). Causality, causal discovery, causal inference and counterfactuals in civil engineering: Causal machine learning and case studies for knowledge discovery. Computers and Concrete. Vol. 31. No. 4. DOI: 10.12989/cac.2023.31.4.277.
Shcherbakovskyi, M. H., Protsenko, A. M. (2024). Ekspertyzy v sudovomu provadzhenni : monohrafiia [Examinations in court proceedings]. Kharkiv. URI: https://dspace.univd.edu.ua/handle/123456789/24257 [in Ukrainian].
Soohoo, M., Arah, O. A. (2023). Investigation of the structure and magnitude of time-varying uncontrolled confounding in simulated cohort data analyzed using g-computation. International Journal of Epidemiology. Art. 52(6):1907-1913. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyad150.
Sun, H., Wang, H., Yang, M., Reniers, G. (2022). A STAMP-based approach to quantitative resilience assessment of chemical process systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety. Vol. 222. DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2022.108397.
Zhang, F., Chen, L., Zhang, B., et al. (2024). An integrated system theoretic process analysis with multilevel flow modeling for the identification of cyber-physical hazards in a process industry. Process Safety Progress. Vol. 43. Is. 3. DOI: 10.1002/prs.12604.
Zhang, Y., Dong, Ch., Guo, W., et al. (2022). Systems theoretic accident model and process (STAMP): A literature review. Safety Science. Vol. 152. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105596.
Zhong, S., Du, J., Jiang, X. (2023). Analysis of energy laboratory safety management in China based on the System-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes/System Theoretic Process Analysis STAMP/STPA model. Sustainability. Vol. 15. No. 15. DOI: 10.3390/su151511505.
