...
首页> 外文期刊>Reliability Engineering & System Safety >Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the expert and non-expert opinion in fire risk in buildings
【24h】

Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the expert and non-expert opinion in fire risk in buildings

机译:建筑物火灾风险专家和非专家意见的定量和定性分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Expert judgment procedure is a method very often used in the area of risk assessments of complex systems or processes to fill in quantitative data. Although it has been proved to be a very reliable source of information when no other data are available, the choice of experts is always questioned. When the available data are limited, the seed questions cover only partially the domains of expertise, which may cause problems. Expertise is assessed not covering the full object of study but only those topics for which seed questions can be formulated. The commonly used quantitative analysis of an expert judgment exercise is combined with a qualitative analysis. The latter adds more insights to the relation between the assessor's field and statistical knowledge and their performance in an expert judgment. In addition the qualitative analysis identifies different types of seed questions. Three groups of assessors with different levels of statistical and domain knowledge are studied. The quantitative analysis shows no differences between field experts and non-experts and no differences between having advanced statistical knowledge or not. The qualitative analysis supports these findings. In addition it is found that especially technical questions are answered with larger intervals. Precaution is required when using seed questions for which the real value can be calculated, which was the case for one of the seed questions.
机译:专家判断程序是在复杂系统或过程的风险评估领域中经常使用的一种方法,用于填充定量数据。尽管在没有其他可用数据的情况下,它已被证明是非常可靠的信息来源,但专家的选择始终受到质疑。当可用数据有限时,种子问题仅部分覆盖专业知识领域,这可能会引起问题。评估的专业知识不会涵盖整个研究对象,而仅涵盖那些可以提出种子问题的主题。专家判断练习中常用的定量分析与定性分析相结合。后者为评估者的领域与统计知识之间的关系及其在专家判断中的表现提供了更多的见解。此外,定性分析还可以识别不同类型的种子问题。研究了三组具有不同统计和领域知识水平的评估者。定量分析表明,现场专家和非专家之间没有差异,而是否拥有高级统计知识也没有差异。定性分析支持了这些发现。此外,发现特别是技术性问题以较大的间隔回答。当使用可以计算实际值的种子问题时,需要采取预防措施,其中一个种子问题就是这种情况。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Reliability Engineering & System Safety》 |2010年第7期|729-741|共13页
  • 作者单位

    Safety Science Group, Faculty of Technology Policy and Management, TU Delft, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

    Safety Science Group, Faculty of Technology Policy and Management, TU Delft, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

    Safety Science Group, Faculty of Technology Policy and Management, TU Delft, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

    Safety Science Group, Faculty of Technology Policy and Management, TU Delft, P.O. Box 5015, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    expert judgment; expert calibration; risk analysis;

    机译:专家判断;专业校准风险分析;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号