The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hybrid Approach for Addressing Uncertainty in Risk Assessments
Abstract
Parameter uncertainty is a major aspect of the model-based estimation of the risk of human exposure to pollutants. The Monte Carlo method, which applies probability theory to address model parameter uncertainty, relies on a statistical representation of available information. In recent years, other uncertainty theories have been proposed as alternative approaches to address model parameter uncertainty in situations where available information is insufficient to identify statistically representative probability distributions, due in particular to data scarcity. The simplest such theory is possibility theory, which uses so-called fuzzy numbers to represent model parameter uncertainty. In practice, it may occur that certain model parameters can be reasonably represented by probability distributions, because there are sufficient data available to substantiate such distributions by statistical analysis, while others are better represented by fuzzy numbers (due to data scarcity). The question then arises as to how these two modes of representation of model parameter uncertainty can be combined for the purpose of estimating the risk of exposure. This paper proposes an approach (termed a hybrid approach) which combines Monte Carlo random sampling of probability distribution functions with fuzzy calculus. The approach is applied to a real case of estimation of human exposure, via vegetable consumption, to cadmium present in the surficial soils of an industrial site located in the north of France. The application illustrates the potential of the proposed approach, which allows the uncertainty affecting model parameters to be represented in a way that is consistent with the information at hand. Also, because the hybrid approach takes advantage of the “rich” information provided by probability distributions, while retaining the conservative character of fuzzy calculus, it is believed to hold value in terms of a “reasonable” application of the precautionary principle.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sequential extraction procedure for the speciation of particulate trace metals
Tessier, A., Campbell, P. G. C., & Bisson, M. (1979) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac50043a017 · Cited by 12,052
Cited by
Possibility theory and statistical reasoning
Dubois, D. (2006) · Computational Statistics & Data Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.csda.2006.04.015 · Cited by 462
Self-citationMachine learning algorithms for construction projects delay risk prediction
Gondia, A., Siam, A., El-Dakhakhni, W., & Nassar, A. H. (2020) · Journal of Construction Engineering and Management · doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001736 · Cited by 327
Islam, M. S., Nepal, M. P., Skitmore, M., & Attarzadeh, M. (2017) · Advanced Engineering Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.aei.2017.06.001 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Guyonnet, D., Bourgine, B., Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Co⁁me, B., & Chilès, J.-P.
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Engineering
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 129
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 68-78
- ISSN
- 0733-9372 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7870
- DOI
- 10.1061/(asce)0733-9372(2003)129:1(68
- OpenAlex
- W1974156822
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hybrid Approach for Addressing Uncertainty in Risk Assessments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1061/(asce)0733-9372(2003)129:1(68
- The paper
- Guyonnet, D., Bourgine, B., Dubois, D., Fargier, H., Co⁁me, B., & Chilès, J.-P. (2003). Hybrid Approach for Addressing Uncertainty in Risk Assessments. Journal of Environmental Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9372(2003)129%3A1(68
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.