4.2 Article

Dependency Idioms for Quantitative Human Reliability Analysis

Journal

NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/00295639.2023.2250159

Keywords

Human reliability analysis; dependency; human error probability; human failure event; performance influencing factor

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper reviews the current conceptualization of dependency and demonstrates that current research is not addressing all the technical gaps in HRA. To address the technical gaps in HRA dependency, a set of fundamental dependency structures are proposed, which provide a robust logical structure emphasizing causality.
Human reliability analysis (HRA) is approaching nearly 60 years of reliance on key aspects of the original HRA method Technique for Human Error Rate Prediction (THERP), including its process for analyzing dependency. Despite advances in computational abilities and HRA-relevant techniques, the conceptualization, modeling, and quantification of dependency have remained largely unchanged since the introduction of THERP. As a result, current HRA methods do not consider dependency in a realistic manner, and there remain foundational gaps related to the definition, lack of causality, and quantification for HRA dependency. In this paper, we review the current conceptualization of dependency and demonstrate that current research in dependency is not addressing all of the technical gaps. To address the outstanding technical gaps in HRA dependency, we propose a set of fundamental dependency structures (HRA dependency idioms) that capture the spectrum of relationships possible between HRA variables. The idioms provide a robust logical structure for HRA dependency that emphasizes causality and is based on a causal Bayesian network modeling architecture. The idioms conceptualize and model HRA dependency in an objective, traceable, and causally informed manner that facilitates data-based quantification of HRA dependency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available