On the treatment of uncertainty and variability in making decisions about risk

Risk Analysis

Volumn 33, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 1899-1907

  Bier, Vicki M ^a   Lin, Shi Woei ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Dependence; Uncertainty; Variability

Indexed keywords

DEPENDENCE; EPISTEMIC UNCERTAINTIES; FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; RISK ACCEPTABILITY; UNCERTAINTY; UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY; VARIABILITY;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DECISION MAKING; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; RESEARCH; RISK ASSESSMENT; TECHNOLOGY; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DEPENDENT PERSONALITY DISORDER; HUMAN; MONTE CARLO METHOD; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNCERTAINTY; VARIABILITY;

DEPENDENCE; UNCERTAINTY; VARIABILITY;

DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; RISK ASSESSMENT; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84885418123     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/risa.12071     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Reactor Safety Study. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Report, WASH-1400, 1975.
2. Apostolakis G, Kaplan S. Pitfalls in risk calculation. Reliability Engineering, 1981; 2:135-145.
3. Kaplan S. A method for handling dependencies and partial dependencies of fragility curves in seismic risk analysis. In Proceedings of the Transactions of the 8th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, August 19-23. Brussels, Belgium, 1985.
4. Cullen AC, Frey HC. Probabilistic Techniques in Exposure Assessment: A Handbook for Dealing with Variability and Uncertainty in Models and Inputs. New York: Plenum Press, 1999.
5. Smith AE, Ryan BP, Evans JS. The effect of neglecting correlations when propagating uncertainty and estimating the population distribution of risk. Risk Analysis, 1992; 12(4):467-474.
6. Kaplan S. On a two-stage Bayesian procedure for determining failure rates from experiential data. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 1983; PAS-102(1):195-199.
7. Paté-Cornell E. Uncertainty in risk analysis: Six levels of treatment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 1996; 54:95-111.
8. National Research Council. Science and Judgment in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1994.
9. Morgan MG, Henrion M. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
10. Brown R, Ulvila JW. Communicating uncertainty for regulatory decisions. Pp. 177-187 in Covello VT, Lave LB, Moghissi A, Uppuluri VRR (eds). Uncertainty in Risk Assessment, Risk Management, and Decision Making. New York: Plenum Press; 1987.
11. Cox Jr. LA, Brown GG, Pollock SM. When is uncertainty about uncertainty worth characterizing? Interface, 2008; 38(6):465-468.
12. Mosleh A, Bier V. Uncertainty about probability: A reconciliation with the subjectivist viewpoint. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 1996; 26(3):303-310.
13. Felli JC, Hazen GB. Sensitivity analysis and the expected value of perfect information. Medical Decision Making, 1998; 18:95-109.
14. Clemen RT, Reilly T. Making Hard Decisions with DecisionTools. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press, 2000.
15. Cullen AC. The sensitivity of probabilistic risk assessment results to alternative model structures: A case study of municipal waste incineration. Journal of Air & Waste Management Association, 1995; 45:538-546.
16. Liebowitz S. Anatomy of a train wreck: Causes of the mortgage meltdown. Pp. 287-322 in Holcombe RG, Powell BW (eds). Housing America: Building out of a Crisis. Oakland, CA: Independent Institute, 2009.
17. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Rating the risks. Environment, 1979; 21(3):14-20, 36-39.
18. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science, 1987; 236(4799):280-285.
19. Keeney RL. Equity and public risk. Operations Research, 1980; 28(3): 527-534.
20. National Research Council. Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2008.
21. Vose J. Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley, 2000.
22. Ferson S, Kreinovich V, Ginzburg L, Myers DS, Sentz K. Constructing Probability Boxes and Dempster-Shafer Structures. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories Report, SAND2002-4015, 2003.
23. Busschaert P, Geeraerd AH, Uyttendaele M, Van Impe JF. Sensitivity analysis of a two-dimensional quantitative microbiological risk assessment: Keeping variability and uncertainty separated. Risk Analysis, 2011; 31(8):1295-1307.
24. Zach L, Bier V. Uncertainty, risk assessment, and food safety. Pp. 1-13, Vol. 3, in Voeller JG (ed). Wiley Handbook of Science and Technology for Homeland Security. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience, 2010.
25. Baert K, De Meulenaer B, Verdonck F, Huybrechts I, De Henauw S, Vanrolleghem PA, Debevere J, Devlieghere F. Variability and uncertainty assessment of patulin exposure for preschool children in Flanders. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2007; 45:1745-1751.
26. Cummins E, Nally P, Butler F, Duffy G, O'Brien S. Development and validation of a probabilistic second-order exposure assessment model for Escherichia coli O157: H7 contamination of beef trimmings from Irish meat plants. Meat Science, 2008; 79:139-154.
27. Linkov I, Burmistrov D. Model uncertainty and choices made by modelers: Lessons learned from the International Atomic Energy Agency model intercomparisons. Risk Analysis, 2003; 23(6):1297-1308.
28. Dubus I, Brown C, Beulke S. Sources of uncertainty in pesticide fate modelling. Science of the Total Environment, 2003; 317:53-72.
29. Thompson KM. Variability and uncertainty meet risk management and risk communication. Risk Analysis, 2003; 22(3):647-654.
30. Cox Jr. LA. What's wrong with hazard-ranking systems? An expository note. Risk Analysis, 2009; 29(7):940-948.
31. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: General Guidance (Standard Review Plan Chapter 19). Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1998.
32. International Nuclear Safety Group. A Framework for an Integrated Risk Informed Decision Making Process. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency Report, INSAG-25, 2011.
33. Bier VM. On the treatment of dependence in making decisions about risk. In Proceedings of the Transactions of the 10th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, August 14-18. Anaheim, CA, 1989.