The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment?
Open accessAbstract
This article discusses the use of quantitative risk assessment (QRA) in decision making regarding the safety of complex technological systems. The insights gained by QRA are compared with those from traditional safety methods and it is argued that the two approaches complement each other. It is argued that peer review is an essential part of the QRA process. The importance of risk‐informed rather than risk‐based decision making is emphasized. Engineering insights derived from QRAs are always used in combination with traditional safety requirements and it is in this context that they should be reviewed and critiqued. Examples from applications in nuclear power, space systems, and an incinerator of chemical agents are given to demonstrate the practical benefits of QRA. Finally, several common criticisms raised against QRA are addressed.
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
Reason, J. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139062367 · Cited by 5,108
Cited by
Risk assessment and risk management: Review of recent advances on their foundation
Aven, T. (2016) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.12.023 · Cited by 1,713
Johansson, J., Hassel, H., & Zio, E. (2013) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2013.02.027 · Cited by 191
Plischke, E., & Borgonovo, E. (2020) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13571 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Apostolakis, G. E.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 515-520
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2074253074
- Cited by
- 411
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00455.x
- The paper
- Apostolakis, G. E. (2004). How Useful Is Quantitative Risk Assessment? Risk Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00455.x
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.
