Quantification of margins and uncertainties

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 96, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 959-964

  Helton, Jon C ^a,b   Pilch, Martin ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SAFETY ENGINEERING;

COMPUTATIONAL CHALLENGES; COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS; NUCLEAR WARHEADS; RELIABILITY ENGINEERING; SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY; STOCKPILE MANAGEMENTS; SYSTEM SAFETY; WIDE SPECTRUM;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

EID: 79959590812     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.03.015     Document Type: Editorial

References (108)

1. B.T. Goodwin, and R.J. Juzaitis National certification methodology for the nuclear weapons stockpile 2006 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory UCRL-TR-223486. Livermore, CA
2. D.H. Sharp, and M.M. Wood-Schultz QMU and nuclear weapons certification: whats under the hood? Los Alamos Science 28 2003 47 53
3. D.H. Sharp, T.C. Wallstrom, and M.M. Wood-Schultz Physics package confidence: one" vs. 1.0" 2004 Los Alamos National Laboratory LA-UR-04-0496. Los Alamos, NM
4. J.N. Booker, T. Ross, M. Hamada, R. Reardon, R. Dolin, and C.L. Faust Engineering index: an engineering/certification metric Military Operations Research 11 2 2006 27 44
5. M. Pilch, T.G. Trucano, and J.C. Helton Ideas underlying the quantification of margins and uncertainties (QMU): a white paper SAND2006-5001 2006 Sandia National Laboratories Albuqurque, NM
6. K. Diegert, S. Klenke, G. Novotny, R. Paulsen, M. Pilch, and T. Trucano Toward a more rigorous application of margins and uncertainties within the nuclear weapons life cycle - a Sandia perspective 2007 Sandia National Laboratories SAND2007-6219. Albuquerque, NM
7. D.M. Higdon, C.M. Anderson-Cook, J.R. Gattiker, A.P. Huzurbazar, L.M. Moore, and R.R. Picard QMU for advanced certification: identifying existing limitations with discussion of solution strategies 2008 Los Alamos National Laboratory LA-UR-08-06887. Los Alamos, NM
8. T.C. Wallstrom Quantification of margins and uncertainty: a Bayesian approach 2008 Los Alamos National Laboratory LA-UR-08-4800. Los Alamos, NM
9. J.C. Helton Conceptual and computational basis for the quantification of margins and uncertainty SAND2009-3055 2009 Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM
10. J.F. Lorio, M.A. Dvorack, M.J. Mundt, K.V. Diegert, J.T. Ringland, and R. Zurn Quantifying reliability uncertainty: a proof of concept 2009 Sandia National Laboratories SAND2009-2173. Albuquerque, NM
11. Abeyta H et-al. Report on the friendly reviews of QMU at the NNSA Laboratories. Defense Programs Science Council; 2004.
12. JASON Quantifications of margins and uncertainties (QMU) 2005 The Mitre Corporation JSR-04-3330. McLean, VA
13. U.S. GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office) Nuclear weapons: NNSA needs to refine and more effectively manage its new approach for assessing and certifying nuclear weapons 2006 U.S. Government Accountability Office GAO-06-261. Washington, DC
14. NAS/NRC (National Academy of Science/National Research Council) Evaluation of quantification of margins and uncertainties for assessing and certifying the reliability of the nuclear stockpile 2008 National Academy Press Washington, DC
15. E. Nikolaidis, D.M. Ghiocel, and S. Singhal Engineering design reliability handbook 2004 CRC Press Boca Raton, FL
16. A. Birolini Reliability engineering: theory and practice 4th ed 2004 Springer New York, NY
17. J.D. Andrews, and T.R. Moss Reliability and risk assessment 2nd ed 2002 ASME Press New York, NY
18. R.E. Melchers Structural reliability analysis and prediction 2nd ed 1999 John Wiley and Sons New York, NY
19. R.E. Barlow Reliability engineering 1998 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Philadelphia, PA
20. I.A. Ushakov Handbook of reliability engineering 1994 Wiley New York, NY
21. B.M. Ayyub Risk analysis in engineering and economics 2003 Chapman and Hall/CRC Boca Raton, FL
22. R.P. Rechard Historical relationship between performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal and other types of risk assessment Risk Analysis 19 5 1999 763 807
23. H. Kumamoto, and E.J. Henley Probabilistic risk assessment and management for engineers and scientists 1996 IEEE Press New York, NY
24. NRC (National Research Council) Science and judgment in risk assessment 1994 National Academy Press Washington, DC
25. J.C. Helton, and R.J. Breeding Calculation of reactor accident safety goals Reliability Engineering and System Safety 39 2 1993 129 158
26. R.J. Breeding, J.C. Helton, E.D. Gorham, and F.T. Harper Summary description of the methods used in the probabilistic risk assessments for NUREG-1150 Nuclear Engineering and Design 135 1 1992 1 27
27. J.S. Wu, and G.E. Apostolakis Experience with probabilistic risk assessment in the nuclear power industry Journal of Hazardous Materials 29 1992 313 345
28. A.K. Finkbeiner The Jasons 2006 Viking New York, NY
29. NNSA (National Nuclear Security Administration) Nuclear weapon assessments using quantification of margins and uncertainties methodologies 2007 National Nuclear Security Administration NNSA Policy Letter: NAP-XX, Draft 5/1/07. Washington, DC
30. S. Kaplan, and B.J. Garrick On the quantitative definition of risk Risk Analysis 1 1 1981 11 27 (Pubitemid 12121289)
31. G.W. Parry, and P.W. Winter Characterization and evaluation of uncertainty in probabilistic risk analysis Nuclear Safety 22 1 1981 28 42
32. G.W. Parry The characterization of uncertainty in probabilistic risk assessments of complex systems Reliability Engineering and System Safety 54 2-3 1996 119 126 (Pubitemid 126365916)
33. G. Apostolakis The concept of probability in safety assessments of technological systems Science 250 4986 1990 1359 1364 (Pubitemid 120031846)
34. J.C. Helton Treatment of uncertainty in performance assessments for complex systems Risk Analysis 14 4 1994 483 511 (Pubitemid 24300014)
35. J.C. Helton Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in the presence of stochastic and subjective uncertainty Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 57 1-4 1997 3 76
36. J.C. Helton, and C.J. Sallaberry Conceptual basis for the definition and calculation of expected dose in performance assessments for the proposed high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Reliability Engineering and System Safety 94 2009 677 698
37. M.E. Paté-Cornell Uncertainties in risk analysis: six levels of treatment Reliability Engineering and System Safety 54 2-3 1996 95 111 (Pubitemid 126365914)
38. A. Mosleh, N. Siu, C. Smidts, and C. Liu Proceedings of workshop I in advanced topics in risk and reliability analysis, model uncertainty: its characterization and quantification 1994 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NUREG/CP-0138. Washington, D.C.
39. D. Draper Assessment and propagation of model uncertainty Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 57 1 1995 45 97
40. Mosleh A et al. editors. Model uncertainty: conceptual and practical issues in risk-informed decision making. Baltimore, MD: Center for Risk and Reliability, University of Maryland; in press.
41. S.C. Hora, and R.L. Iman Expert opinion in risk analysis: the NUREG-1150 methodology Nuclear Science and Engineering 102 4 1989 323 331 (Pubitemid 20600442)
42. M.C. Thorne, and A. Williams MMR. Review of expert judgement techniques with reference to nuclear safety Progress in Nuclear Safety 27 23 1992 83 254
43. R.J. Budnitz, G. Apostolakis, D.M. Boore, L.S. Cluff, K.J. Coppersmith, C.A. Cornell, and P.A. Morris Use of technical expert panels: applications to probabilistic seismic hazard analysis Risk Analysis 18 4 1998 463 469
44. M. McKay, and M. Meyer Critique of and limitations on the use of expert judgements in accident consequence uncertainty analysis Radiation Protection Dosimetry 90 3 2000 325 330
45. B.M. Ayyub Elicitation of expert opinions for uncertainty and risks 2001 CRC Press Boca Raton, FL
46. R.M. Cooke Goossens LHJ. Expert judgement elicitation for risk assessment of critical infrastructures Journal of Risk Research 7 6 2004 643 656
47. R.M. Cooke Experts in uncertainty: opinion and subjective probability in science 1991 Oxford University Press Oxford; New York
48. P.H. Garthwaite, J.B. Kadane, and A. OHagan Statistical methods for eliciting probability distributions Journal of the American Statistical Association 100 470 2005 680 700 (Pubitemid 40816603)
49. M.D. McKay, R.J. Beckman, and W.J. Conover A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code Technometrics 21 2 1979 239 245 (Pubitemid 9452235)
50. R.L. Iman, and W.J. Conover Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, with an application to risk assessment Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods A9 17 1980 1749 1842
51. R.L. Iman, and W.J. Conover A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables Communications in Statistics: Simulation and Computation B11 3 1982 311 334
52. J.C. Helton, and F.J. Davis Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems Reliability Engineering and System Safety 81 1 2003 23 69
53. I.M. Sobol On the distribution of points in a cube and the approximate evaluation of integrals USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 7 1967 86 112
54. P. Bratley, and B.L. Fox ALGORIHTM 659 implementing Sobols quasirandom sequence generator ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 14 1988 88 100 (Pubitemid 18618268)
55. D. Kurowicka, and R. Cooke Uncertainty analysis with high dimensional dependence modelling 2006 Wiley Chichester, West Sussex, England
56. M.S. Hamada, A.G. Wilson, C.S. Reese, and H.F. Martz Bayesian reliability 2008 Springer New York, NY
57. A. OHagan Bayesian analysis of computer code outputs: a tutorial Reliability Engineering and System Safety 91 1011 2006 1290 1300
58. J.E. Oakley, and A. OHagan Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: a Bayesian approach Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B: Statistical Methodology 66 3 2004 751 769 (Pubitemid 39015911)
59. C. Baudrit, and D. Dubois Practical representations of incomplete probabilistic knowledge Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 51 1 2006 86 108 (Pubitemid 44634788)
60. D. Dubois, H.T. Nguyen, and H. Prade Possibility theory, probability theory and fuzzy sets: misunderstandings, bridges and gaps D. Dubois, H. Prade, Fundamentals of fuzzy sets 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers Boston, MA 343 438
61. D. Dubois, and H. Prade Fuzzy sets, probability and measurement European Journal of Operational Research 40 1989 135 154
62. J.C. Helton, J.D. Johnson, and W.L. Oberkampf An exploration of alternative approaches to the representation of uncertainty in model predictions Reliability Engineering and System Safety 85 1-3 2004 39 71
63. G.J. Klir Measures of uncertainty and information D. Dubois, H. Prade, Fundamentals of fuzzy sets 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers Boston, MA 439 457
64. T.J. Ross, J.M. Booker, and W.J. Parkinson Fuzzy logic and probability applications: bridging the gap 2002 Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Philadelphia, PA
65. P. Smets Probability, possibility, belief: which and where? D.M. Grabbay, P. Smets, Handbook of defeasible reasoning and uncertainty management systems 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers Boston, MA 1 24
66. J.S. Wu, G.E. Apostolakis, and D. Okrent Uncertainty in system analysis: probabilistic versus nonprobabilistic theories Reliability Engineering and System Safety 30 1990 163 181 (Pubitemid 20729084)
67. R.L. Iman, and J.C. Helton An investigation of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models Risk Analysis 8 1 1988 71 90
68. Y. Ronen Uncertainty analysis 1988 CRC Press, Inc. Boca Raton, FL
69. J.C. Helton Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal Reliability Engineering and System Safety 42 23 1993 327 367
70. D.M. Hamby A review of techniques for parameter sensitivity analysis of environmental models Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 32 2 1994 135 154
71. A. Saltelli, K. Chan, and E.M. Scott Sensitivity analysis 2000 Wiley New York, NY
72. H.C. Frey, and S.R. Patil Identification and review of sensitivity analysis methods Risk Analysis 22 3 2002 553 578 (Pubitemid 34655123)
73. M. Ionescu-Bujor, and D.G. Cacuci A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems - I: deterministic methods Nuclear Science and Engineering 147 3 2004 189 2003
74. D.G. Cacuci, and M. Ionescu-Bujor A comparative review of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of large-scale systems - II: statistical methods Nuclear Science and Engineering 147 3 2004 204 217
75. A. Saltelli, M. Ratto, S. Tarantola, and F. Campolongo Sensitivity analysis for chemical models Chemical Reviews 105 7 2005 2811 2828
76. A. Saltelli, M. Ratto, T. Andres, F. Campolongo, J. Cariboni, and D. Gatelli Global sensitivity analysis: the primer 2008 Wiley New York, NY
77. J.C. Helton, J.D. Johnson, C.J. Sallaberry, and C.B. Storlie Survey of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis Reliability Engineering and System Safety 91 1011 2006 1175 1209
78. B.E. Boyack, I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, P. Griffith, K.R. Katsma, and G.S. Lellouche Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 1: an overview of the code scaling, applicability, and uncertainty evaluation methodology Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 1 15
79. B.E. Boyack, I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, P. Griffith, K.R. Katsma, and G.S. Lellouche Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 2: characterization of important contributors to uncertainty Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 17 31
80. W. Wulff, B.E. Boyack, I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, P. Griffith, and K.R. Katsma Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 3: assessment and ranging of parameters Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 33 65
81. G.S. Lellouche, P.S. Levy, B.E. Boyack, I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, and P. Griffith Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 4: uncertainty evaluation of LBLOCA analysis based on TRAC-PF1/MOD 1 Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 67 95
82. N. Zuber, G.E. Wilson, B.E. Boyack, I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, and P. Griffith Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 5: evaluation of scale-up capabilities of best estimate codes Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 97 107
83. I. Catton, R.B. Duffey, R.A. Shaw, B.E. Boyack, P. Griffith, and K.R. Katsma Quantifying reactor safety margins, part 6: a physically based method of estimating PWR large break loss of coolant accident PCT Nuclear Engineering and Design 119 1 1990 109 117
84. T.G. Theofanous Discussion on quantifying reactor safety margins Nuclear Engineering and Design 132 1992 403 447
85. M. Kristof, T. Kliment, A. Petruzzi, and J. Lipka RELAP5 simulation of surge line break accident using combined and best estimate plus uncertainty approaches Nuclear Engineering and Design 239 2009 2500 2513
86. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) Best estimate safety analysis for nuclear power plants: uncertainty evaluation 2008 International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna
87. A. Prosek, and B. Mavko The state-of-the-art theory and applications of best-estimate plus uncertainty methods Nuclear Technology 158 2005 69 79
88. F. DAuria, A. Bousbia-Salah, A. Petruzzi, and A. Del Nevo Sate of the art in using best estimate calculation tools in nuclear technology Nuclear Engineering and Technology 38 1 2006 11 32
89. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA guide for the verification and validation of computational fluid dynamics simulations 1998 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AIAA G-077-1998. Reston, VA
90. P.J. Roache Verification and validation in computational science and engineering 1998 Hermosa Publishers Albuquerque, NM
91. W.L. Oberkampf, and T.G. Trucano Verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics Progress in Aerospace Sciences 38 3 2002 209 272 (Pubitemid 34863048)
92. W.L. Oberkampf, T.G. Trucano, and C. Hirsch Verification, validation, and predictive capability in computational engineering and physics Applied Mechanics Review 57 5 2004 345 384 (Pubitemid 40748670)
93. P.J. Roache Building PDE codes to be verifiable and validatable Computing in Science and Engineering 6 5 2004 30 38
94. I. Babuska, and J.T. Oden Verification and validation in computational engineering and science: basic concepts Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 193 3638 2004 4057 4066 (Pubitemid 39142612)
95. T.G. Trucano, L.P. Swiler, T. Igusa, W.L. Oberkampf, and M. Pilch Calibration, validation, and sensitivity analysis: whats what Reliability Engineering and System Safety 91 1011 2006 1331 1357
96. W.L. Oberkampf, and C.J. Roy Verification and validation in scientific computing 2010 Cambridge University Press New York, NY
97. U.S. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) Reactor safety study - an assessment of accident risks in U.S. commercial nuclear power plants 1975 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission WASH-1400 (NUREG-75/014). Washington, DC
98. PLG (Pickard Lowe and Garrick Inc., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and Fauske & Associates, Inc.) Indian point probabilistic safety study 1982 Pickard, Lowe and Garrick, Inc. Irvine, CA
99. PLG (Pickard Lowe and Garrick Inc., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, and Fauske & Associates, Inc.) Seabrook station probabilistic safety assessment. Prepared for public service company of New Hampshire and Yankee Atomic Electric Company 1983 Pickard, Lowe and Garrick, Inc. Irvine, CA (Available from the NTIS as PB84-186949 and PB84-186931)
100. U.S. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) Severe accident risks: an assessment for five U.S. nuclear power plants vols. 13 19901991 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, Division of Systems Research NUREG-1150. Washington, DC
101. A.C. Payne Jr. Analysis of the LaSalle unit 2 nuclear power plant: risk methods integration and evaluation program (RMIEP). summary 1992 Sandia National Laboratories NUREG/CR-4832, SAND92-0537. Albuquerque, NM
102. F.T. Harper, L.H.J. Goosens, R.M. Cooke, J.C. Helton, S.C. Hora, and J.A. Jones Joint USNRC/CEC consequence uncertainty study: summary of objectives, approach, application, and results for the dispersion and deposition uncertainty assessment 1994 Sandia National Laboratories NUREG/CR-6244, SAND94-1453. Albuquerque, NM
103. U.S. NRC (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) An approach for using probabilistic risk assessment in risk-informed decisions on plant specific changes to the licensing basis 1998 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.174. Washington, DC
104. U.S. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) Title 40 CFR part 191 compliance certification application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant vols. IXXI 1996 U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant DOE/CAO-1996-2184. Carlsbad, NM
105. J.C. Helton, and M.G. Marietta Special issue: The 1996 performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Reliability engineering and system safety 69(1-3) 2000 1 451
106. J.C. Helton Mathematical and numerical approaches in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal: dealing with uncertainty E.M. Scott, Modelling radioactivity in the environment 2003 Elsevier Science New York, NY 353 390
107. SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) Total system performance assessment model/analysis for the license application 2008 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management MDL-WIS-PA-000005 Rev 00, AD 01. Las Vegas, NV
108. J.C. Helton, and C.J. Sallaberry Treatment of uncertainty in performance assessments for the geological disposal of radioactive waste J. Ahn, M.J. Apted, Geological reopositories for safe disposal of spent fuels and radioactive materials: advanced technologies 2010 Woodhead Publishing Cambridge, UK 547 579