Abstract
This paper compares some features of Bayesian estimation techniques developed recently to assimilate data from multiple units to obtain effective estimators of failure rates for individual units. Several problems have been identified recently in various“two-stage” super-population methods [1, 2]. Hofer et al.[3] noticed that the results obtained with the method are sensitive to the order and ranges of multidimensional integration, and in the limit the results behave as if the components (or plants) were completely identical. Such lack of variation was also noticed in a common-cause failure study [4]. Becker and Schubert obtained suspicious results with the 2-stage method [5]. Meyer and Hennings [6] studied the impacts of different forms of the improper hyper-priors and integration limits. Hofer and Peschke re-formulated the method so that the population variability is better accounted for [7]. Bunea et al [8] claim that this approach still has some mathematical problems, and the choice of super-population and integration ranges are not always uniquely established. One problem with all these 2-stage-methods is that numerical methods are needed to calculate multidimensional integrals. This is a burden with hundreds of components in realistic risk assessment studies (PSA).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Shultis J K et al, Report NUREG/CR-2374, USNRC, 1981
Kaplan S, IEEE Trans. Power App. Syst. 102, 195–202, 1983
Hofer E et al., Risk Analysis 17(2) 249–252, 1997
Bidwell D A, In YH, Proceedings PSA′99, 305–309, 1999
Becker G, Schubert B, Proceedings ESREL′98, 487-494, 1998
Meyer W, Hennings W, Proceedings ESREL′99, 893-898, 1999
Hofer E, Peschke J, Proceedings ESREL′99, 881-886, 1999
Bunea C et al., Two-stage Bayesian models — application to ZEDB project. Proceedings of ESREL 2003, vol. 1, 321-329. A.A. BALKEMA, Lisse, 2003
Bunea C et al., A non-parametric two-stage Bayesian model using Dirichlet distribution. Proceedings of ESREL 2003, vol. 1, 331-337. A.A. BALKEMA, Lisse, 2003
Vaurio J K, Risk Analysis, Vol. 7, No. 3, 329–338, 1987
Jänkälä K E, Vaurio J K, Proceedings PSA′87, 281-286, 1987
Vaurio J K, Jänkälä K E, Effective Empirical Parametric Estimation of Failure Rates and Event Frequencies. Proceedings of PSAM5, vol. 4, 2143–2148. Universal Academy Press, Tokyo, 2000
Vaurio J K, Jänkälä K E, James-Stein Estimators for Failure Rates and Probabilities. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 36, 35–39, 1992 (also in SRE Symposium, Nyköping, 8-10 October 1990)
Jänkälä K E, Vaurio J K, Proceedings PSA′93, 804-810, 1993
Lehto M, Jänkälä K, Mohsen B, Vaurio JK, Proceedings PSA′96, 507-514, 1996
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag London
About this paper
Cite this paper
Vaurio, J., Jänkälä, K. (2004). Evaluation and Comparison of Estimation Methods for Failure Rates and Probabilities. In: Spitzer, C., Schmocker, U., Dang, V.N. (eds) Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-410-4_54
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-410-4_54
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-1057-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-410-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive