2020
DOI: 10.1177/1748006x20968954
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An integrated risk index accounting for epistemic uncertainty in probability risk assessment

Abstract: In this paper, we present an integrated framework for quantifying epistemic uncertainty in probabilistic risk assessment. Three types of epistemic uncertainty, that is, completeness, structural and parametric uncertainties, are considered. A maturity model is developed to evaluate the management of these epistemic uncertainties in the model building process. The impact of epistemic uncertainty on the result of the risk assessment is, then, estimated based on the developed maturity model. Then, an integrated ri… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 49 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Zhang, Bai, Shi, Zhang, and Luo (2021) focused on the risk of lithium battery thermal runaway events, proposing and calculating relevant risk indices for safety assessment. Zeng, Bani-Mustafa, Flage, and Zio (2020) introduced a comprehensive framework for quantifying cognitive uncertainties in probabilistic risk assessment and validated it. However, existing studies typically rely on expert experience to assign risk levels, showing evident subjectivity and making it difficult to accurately and quantitatively derive objective weight vectors.…”
Section: Safety Assessment Based On Risk Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Zhang, Bai, Shi, Zhang, and Luo (2021) focused on the risk of lithium battery thermal runaway events, proposing and calculating relevant risk indices for safety assessment. Zeng, Bani-Mustafa, Flage, and Zio (2020) introduced a comprehensive framework for quantifying cognitive uncertainties in probabilistic risk assessment and validated it. However, existing studies typically rely on expert experience to assign risk levels, showing evident subjectivity and making it difficult to accurately and quantitatively derive objective weight vectors.…”
Section: Safety Assessment Based On Risk Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%