Risk measurement, system

Positions that had been held on the trading book of some banks became difficult to value and risk manage due to the withdrawal of liquidity. Some risk measurement systems did not make sufficient allowance for the risk of significant credit spread widening and credit migration, since they referred to risk data sets for the previous two to three years before 2007, which showed a fairly stable credit environment. 

The relationships between the importance measures is based on the assumption that the systems are not reconfigured in response to a component outage. If this is done, the basic definition of the importance measure is still valid but there is not such a simple relationship. Disregarding this complication, some interpretations of the importances may be made. The Bimbaum Importance is the risk that results when the i-th system has failed (i.e., it is the A, term in Equation 2.8-9). Inspection Importance and RRWI are the risk due to accident sequences containing the i-th system. Fussell- Vesely Importance is similar except it is divided by the risk so may be interpreted as the fraction of the total risk that is in the sequences contains the Q-th system. The Risk Achievement Worth Ratio (RAWR) is the ratio of the risk with system 1 failed to the total risk and is necessarily greater than one. The Risk Achievement Worth Increment (RAWI) is the incremental risk increase if system 1 fails and the Risk Reduction Worth Ratio (RRWR) is the fraction by which the risk is reduced if system 1 were infallible. 

The next level of presentation is a technical summary that gives details of the risks including the system s importance measures systems, effects of data changes, and assumptions that are critical to the conclusions. It details the conduct of the analysis - especially the treatment of controversial points. The last level of presentation includes all of the details including a roadmap to the analysis so a peer can trace the calculations and repeat them for verification. 

CNTs show sign of toxicity. Although biomolecules functionalized CNTs can be cleaned from blood circulation system by renal secretion, so far the course of CNTs metabolism in cells or environment, and the potential measurements to reduce CNTs toxicity, is still not clear. How to clarity those mechanisms and reduced risk measurements associated with CNTs toxicity is a great challenge. 

In order to understand the effect of each term on the overall objective function of the system, different values of 0i and 02 are evaluated to construct the efficient frontier of expected cost versus risk measured by standard deviation. This will be demonstrated in the illustrative case studies. 

Recommendation 4-2. The Army should expedite obtaining necessary risk information so interested parties can compare the baseline incineration system and the modified baseline process. An important step for ensuring that the necessary risk information is obtained in a timely manner is the establishment of a comprehensive risk management framework. Such a framework would clearly identify the risk measures of interest and reflect the criteria specified in Public Law 105-261 and the NEPA NOI concerning a disposal facility for the Pueblo stockpile. 

David Eddy at Duke University has written extensively on the problems and potential solutions related to pharmaceutical performance measurement systems. According to a U.S. survey, the most commonly perceived problems with pharmaceutical performance measurement systems are limitations with billing and administrative databases, lack of time to review summary data by physicians, and incomplete data. Other limitations include risk adjustment (what if my practice has sicker patients), overreliance on administrative (claims) data rather than clinical data (therefore lacking key patient outcomes), patient individuality and variation in medical practice, and lack of capacity for taking into account a discipline-specific rather than a whole programs-oriented CQI approach. There has also been some debate on the reliability of performance measurement systems to assess the true impact of physician care on the quality of health care.t ... 

Applicable target risk limits (TR) for health protection can be matched to levels specified by the environmental regulatory authority. Toxicological parameters for each contaminant can be determined from published references, such as the U S. EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Exposure rates correspond to the chronic rate of contact or intake of the affected exposure medium (air, water, soil) by the receptor under anticipated land use conditions. As a conservative measure, these rates can be estimated based on standard exposure factors published by the regulatory authority or other source (e.g., American Industrial Health Council) for the anticipated land use at the site (e.g., residential, commercial, etc.). 

Equipment (e.g. infusion pump) and measurement systems should be standardised to remove much of the risks of calculation errors as well as to reduce the time required for dose calculation. 

The use of hypothesis testing to define the LLD has been evaluated previously (1-4), Two states of any measurement system composed of normally distributed random uncertainties are considered the null hypothesis state in which the samples contain no net radioactivity and the distribution about the net count of zero is characterized by the Hean (v ) and the standard deviation (Oq) and, the LLD state (Currie s "alternate hypothesis" in the NUREG) in which the distribution about the net counts at the LLD is characterized by the mean (vq) and the standard deviation (oq). The ultimate question for any sample data is "Which state is most, consistent with the data ". In making this decision, there is a chance that we will falsely conclude the data is part of the distribution about the LLD or that we will falsely conclude the data is part of the distribution about the net count of zero. These risks are defined by the probabilities a and P respectively. These risk probabilities may be chosen at any level... 

Figure 17.3 shows how progress on the overall risk management system can be measured. It uses the elements of PSM listed in Chapter 1. 

Safety professionals must understand that the quality of the management decisions made to avoid, eliminate, or control hazards and risks are impacted directly by the validity of the information they provide through their performance measurement systems. Their ability to provide accurate information to be used in the decision-making is a measure of their effectiveness. 

But, no statistical, historical performance measurement system can assess the quality of safety in place that encompasses low probability-high consequence incidents since such events seldom appear in the statistical history. Example A risk assessment concludes that a defined catastrophic event, one that has not happened and is not represented in the statistical base, has an occurrence probability of once in 200 plant operating years.)... 

An understanding of the nature of hazards and the risks that derive from them is necessary in determining what performance measurement systems can give reasonably accurate assessments of the quality of safety management, and the extent to which those systems can be predictive. To help in developing that understanding, this outline of thoughts is offered. 

Because of the impossibility of knowing about every risk on an anticipatory basis, it is folly to expect that a perfect performance measurement system can be developed. Also, because of human limitations, it is not possible for an employer to attain a risk-free environment and assure zero occurrences of hazards-related incidents. 

Those famiMar with the concepts of risk understand that attaining zero risk is impossible and that a predictive measurement system that can identify every possible risk on an anticipatory basis has not yet been developed. Furthermore, I believe we have to admit that we are not good yet at having developed measurement systems to determine whether cause-and-effect relationships exist for the safety interventions we propose. 

Furthermore, if safety measures for self-rescue can not be assessed within a quantitative risk analysis, the risk judgement system does not motivate companies or local authorities to take measures, because their effects are not visible in a state-of-the-art risk assessment. 

When sales go above expected levels, the company is at risk for lost profits. If actual sales were 130,000, for example, the profit potential is 3.9 million instead of the budgeted 3,000,000, a market mediation cost of 900,000. Most measurement systems ignore this reality. 

---