Ivette Raices Cruz
A suggestion for the quantification of precise and bounded probability to quantify epistemic uncertainty in scientific assessments
Raices Cruz, Ivette; Troffaes, Matthias; Sahlin, Ullrika
Abstract
An honest communication of uncertainty about quantities of interest enhances transparency in scientific assessments. To support this communication, risk assessors should choose appropriate ways to evaluate and characterize epistemic uncertainty. A full treatment of uncertainty requires methods that distinguish aleatory from epistemic uncertainty. Quantitative expressions for epistemic uncertainty are advantageous in scientific assessments because they are non-ambiguous and enable individual uncertainties to be characterized and combined in a systematic way. Since 2019, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recommends assessors to express epistemic uncertainty in conclusions of scientific assessments quantitatively by subjective probability. A subjective probability can be used to represent an expert judgment, which may or may not be updated using Bayes’s rule to integrate evidence available for the assessment and could be either precise or approximate. Approximate (or bounded) probabilities may be enough for decision making and allow experts to reach agreement on certainty when they struggle to specify precise subjective probabilities. The difference between the lower and upper bound on a subjective probability can also be used to reflect someone’s strength of knowledge. In this paper, we demonstrate how to quantify uncertainty by bounded probability, and explicitly distinguish between epistemic and aleatory uncertainty, by means of robust Bayesian analysis, including standard Bayesian analysis through precise probability as a special case. For illustration the two analyses are applied to an intake assessment.
Citation
Raices Cruz, I., Troffaes, M., & Sahlin, U. (2022). A suggestion for the quantification of precise and bounded probability to quantify epistemic uncertainty in scientific assessments. Risk Analysis, 42(2), 239-253. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13871
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Acceptance Date | Dec 2, 2021 |
Online Publication Date | Jan 10, 2022 |
Publication Date | 2022-02 |
Deposit Date | Dec 3, 2021 |
Publicly Available Date | Jan 11, 2022 |
Journal | Risk Analysis |
Print ISSN | 0272-4332 |
Electronic ISSN | 1539-6924 |
Publisher | Wiley |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 42 |
Issue | 2 |
Pages | 239-253 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13871 |
Public URL | https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1221311 |
Files
Published Journal Article (Early View)
(794 Kb)
PDF
Publisher Licence URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Copyright Statement
Early View © 2021 The Authors. Risk Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Risk Analysis
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
You might also like
A constructive theory for conditional lower previsions only using rational valued probability mass functions with finite support
(2023)
Presentation / Conference Contribution
Using probability bounding to improve decision making for offshore wind planning in industry
(2023)
Presentation / Conference Contribution
A robust Bayesian analysis of variable selection under prior ignorance
(2022)
Journal Article
Downloadable Citations
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2025
Advanced Search