Talk:Probabilistic risk assessment/Archives/2011

About source
Much of the content of this page seems to be copied verbatim from the NASA document http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/qnews/pra.pdf MartinPool 00:59, 18 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Which is under External links. U.S. government products (text, pictures, etc.) can't be copyrighted. Simesa 07:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Redundant term
The term "Probabilistic risk assessment" is redundant because the concept of risk already includes probability. The term "Risk assessment" should be used (and *is* used in many fields). Armando Serrano 12:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * As a (former) practitioner, I used probabilistic to help differentiate from a qualitative assessment. Risk assessment can be applied to many things if you qualitatively compare the risks.  PRA/PSA (probabilistic safety analysis/assessment- which you may prefer) only refers to the real fault tree/event tree stuff.  I agree with your "should," but it's important to recognize that PRA is a lot more than some of these other risk programs.  Otherwise the layman may not appreciate the depth of analysis.Alfredo22 03:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I guess the two terms should be 'qualitative' and '(semi-)quantitative' risk assessment - the former is for school trips, the later for nuclear safety cases - but the two uses, 'risk assessment ' and PRA/PSA have been in common use at least since WASH-1400, so we can only carry on (But I note that, in ALARP methods, the terms qualitative ALARP, (and quantitative ALARP?) have stuck). Bob aka Linuxlad 07:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Commercial Software Site
Addition of GoldSim at the bottom of the page adds absolutely nothing to the article. The site itself contains no useful information. Suggest removal. RhodesScholar 06:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)