1998
DOI: 10.2172/291005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Probabilistic accident consequence uncertainty analysis -- Uncertainty assessment for internal dosimetry. Volume 2: Appendices

Abstract: LEGALNOTICENeither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of the information in this volume. NUREGlCR-6571 ii DISCLAIMERPortions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. AbstractThe development of two new probabilistic accident consequence codes, MACCS and COSYMA, was completed in 1990.These codes estimate the risk presented by nuclear installati… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 73 publications
(126 reference statements)
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These items should be reviewed to ascertain any avoidable causes of discrepancy. (13) Feed back communication with the experts. 14Post-processing analyses describing the methods for processing the uncertainties of the combined expert assessments (resulting from the query variables, defined in step 3) into uncertainties on the target variables from step 2.…”
Section: Post-elicitation: (11)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These items should be reviewed to ascertain any avoidable causes of discrepancy. (13) Feed back communication with the experts. 14Post-processing analyses describing the methods for processing the uncertainties of the combined expert assessments (resulting from the query variables, defined in step 3) into uncertainties on the target variables from step 2.…”
Section: Post-elicitation: (11)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The U.S. Nuclear Regulation Commission (NRC) Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) Working Group has defined two types of uncertainty that may be present in any calculation: (1) stochastic uncertainty caused by the natural variability in a parameter and (2) state-of-knowledge uncertainty, which results from a lack of complete information about phenomena (Goossens et al 1998). The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) noted that there is a distinction between uncertainties that reflect stochastic variability and uncertainties that result from a lack of knowledge about either a single true value or true but unknown distribution of values (NCRP 1996(NCRP , 1998.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An EU-American project assessed the uncertainty of internal dosimetry by means of expert judgment (Goossens et al 1998). Leggett et al (1998) andNCRP (1998) addressed the reliability of ICRP biokinetic models and the sources of uncertainty in the biokinetic and dosimetric models.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uncertainty in these models is often defined as the ratio of the 95 th to the 5 th percentile values in the curve: this is the definition used in this Report. Recent studies have attempted to quantify uncertainties using probabilistic techniques, and some studies (eg Goossens et al, 1997;NCRP, 1997) have estimated that the uncertainties in the organ dose coefficients of some radionuclides can be very large (see section 2.7 of Part 2).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cs (all tissues), 7-8 for thyroid dose from 131 I, and 20-40 for bone surface and red bone marrow doses from 90 Sr (Apostoaei and Miller, 2004). In a large exercise on uncertainties (Goossens et al, 1997), involving aggregation of uncertainty ranges obtained by a panel of experts, combined 90% confidence intervals quoted by Harrison et al (1998) Pu bone marrow dose after ingestion. These larger ranges were partly attributable to uncertainties over the chemical forms that might be ingested or inhaled (Harrison et al, 1998).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%