The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Treatment of Uncertainty in Performance Assessments for Complex Systems
Abstract
When viewed at a high level, performance assessments (PAs) for complex systems involve two types of uncertainty: stochastic uncertainty, which arises because the system under study can behave in many different ways, and subjective uncertainty, which arises from a lack of knowledge about quantities required within the computational implementation of the PA. Stochastic uncertainty is typically incorporated into a PA with an experimental design based on importance sampling and leads to the final results of the PA being expressed as a complementary cumulative distribution function (CCDF). Subjective uncertainty is usually treated with Monte Carlo techniques and leads to a distribution of CCDFs. This presentation discusses the use of the Kaplan/Garrick ordered triple representation for risk in maintaining a distinction between stochastic and subjective uncertainty in PAs for complex systems. The topics discussed include (1) the definition of scenarios and the calculation of scenario probabilities and consequences, (2) the separation of subjective and stochastic uncertainties, (3) the construction of CCDFs required in comparisons with regulatory standards (e.g., 40 CFR Part 191, Subpart B for the disposal of radioactive waste), and (4) the performance of uncertainty and sensitivity studies. Results obtained in a preliminary PA for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, an uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of the MACCS reactor accident consequence analysis model, and the NUREG‐1150 probabilistic risk assessments are used for illustration.
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
The Use of the Rank Transform in Regression
Iman, R. L., & Conover, W. J. (1979) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1979.10489820 · Cited by 514
Cited by
Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems
Helton, J. C., & Davis, F. J. (2003) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/s0951-8320(03)00058-9 · Cited by 2,688
Self-citationSurvey of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
Helton, J. C., Johnson, J. D., Sallaberry, C. J., & Storlie, C. B. (2006) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.017 · Cited by 1,237
Self-citationThe risk concept—historical and recent development trends
Aven, T. (2012) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.006 · Cited by 596
Uncertainty in Integrated Assessment Modelling
van Asselt, M. B. A., & Rotmans, J. (2002) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1023/a:1015783803445 · Cited by 379
Helton, J. C., Davis, F. J., & Johnson, J. D. (2005) · Reliability Engineering & System Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ress.2004.09.006 · Cited by 278
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Helton, J. C.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1994-08
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 483-511
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2064520209
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.89
- 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: Treatment of Uncertainty in Performance Assessments for Complex Systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00266.x
- The paper
- Helton, J. C. (1994). Treatment of Uncertainty in Performance Assessments for Complex Systems. Risk Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00266.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.