Acceptable, 0.eight 0.9 is superior, and 0.9 is great. A total of 181 fire-safety specialists participated in the survey as shown in Table 6. Classified by occupation, there had been 125 fire officers, four university professors majoring in firefighting and disaster prevention, 17 researchers from research institutes associated to firefighting, 19 members in the Korea Fire Safety Institute (KFSI)/Korea Disaster Prevention Association (KFDA), 12 business experts in charge of designing fire extinguishing facilities, and 4 staff from fire insurance coverage corporations. Among them, 118 authorities with much more than ten years of work expertise accounted for about 65 of the total number of experts. The survey was performed making use of face-to-face and remote solutions, contemplating the schedule with the professionals as well as the specific circumstances produced by the COVID-19 pandemic.Table six. Common facts from the fire safety professionals who participated inside the survey.Function Knowledge Division Responsibilities Fire suppression and initially help Fire administration Firefighting investigation Study and education associated to firefighting/disaster prevention Analysis associated to firefighting/disaster prevention Activation and education of firefighting/disaster prevention Designing fire extinguishing facilities Sensible affairs in building fire insurance Total Total 89 28 8 four 17 19 12 4 181 0 years 10 51 6 1 0 three two 0 0 63 10 years 19 29 ten 5 2 ten 4 4 three 67 20 years 9 12 2 2 four 13 eight 1Fire officer University professor Researcher Association Business Insurance3. Final results 3.1. Results of Fire Security Specialist Survey The results on the total typical score and self-confidence interval for the preliminary FRI evaluation items are presented in Table 7. Within the benefits of this professional survey, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for fire extraction facilities, building details, and threat variables wereSustainability 2021, 13,11 ofcalculated as 0.783, 0.822, and 0.792, respectively, plus the reliability was analyzed to become acceptable or larger.Table 7. Benefits of total typical score and confidence interval in the FRI preliminary evaluation things.GYY4137 Autophagy Category 1 two three 4 five 6 7 1 two 3 four five 6 7 8 1 2 three four five CI four Preliminary Evaluation Things Outdoor fire extinguisher Outside fire hydrant Fire detection program Sprinkler Size of your 119 Security Center Distance to 119 Safety Center Distance to A E Year of completion Constructing structure Principal use of Pinacidil Potassium Channel creating Quantity of upper ground levels Number of decrease ground levels Gross floor region of building Type of creating cladding Quantity of frequent creating occupants History of fire incidents Illegal alterations Illegal parking Electrical gear LNG cylinder TA 1 four.06 3.93 four.13 four.25 3.80 4.06 three.49 3.72 4.03 three.67 3.83 three.52 3.99 four.45 three.90 three.34 four.35 four.20 four.19 three.82 SD 2 0.82 0.83 1.00 0.93 0.87 0.83 1.00 0.90 0.82 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.88 0.81 0.96 1.01 0.83 1.02 0.82 0.87 V3 0.67 0.68 0.99 0.87 0.76 0.69 1.01 0.80 0.67 0.84 0.88 0.93 0.77 0.65 0.91 1.01 0.68 1.04 0.68 0.75 Upper three.94 3.81 3.99 4.11 3.67 three.94 three.35 3.59 3.91 3.54 three.70 3.38 3.87 4.33 three.76 3.19 4.23 four.05 4.07 3.69 Decrease four.17 four.05 4.28 four.38 three.93 four.18 3.64 three.85 four.15 three.81 three.97 three.67 four.12 4.56 four.04 3.48 4.47 4.35 four.31 3.94 CAFire extinguishing facilities0.Construction information0.Threat factors0.1TA: Total average; 2 SD: Standard deviation; three V: Variance; four CI: Self-confidence interval of 95 confidence level; CA: Cronbach’s alpha coefficient.The total average with the preliminary FRI evaluation things was within the order of form of creating cladding (four.4.