Skip to main content

Fuzzy Risk Analysis Vs. Probability Risk Analysis

  • Chapter
Soft Computing for Risk Evaluation and Management

Part of the book series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing ((STUDFUZZ,volume 76))

  • 280 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we discuss the essential difference between fuzzy risk analysis and probability risk analysis. Then, we use the method of the information distribution to improve probability estimate in the probability risk analysis, and we develop the method to calculate the fuzzy risk with respect to the possibility-probability. The benefit of fuzzy risk assessment is that the new result saves more information for risk management.

Project Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China, No.49971001

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. C.B. Brown, A fuzzy safety measure, J. Engineering Mechanics 105 (1979), 855–872.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chongfu Huang and Da Ruan, Information diffusion principle and application in fuzzy neuron, Fuzzy Logic Foundations and Industrial Applications (edited by Da Ruan, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts, 1996 ), 165–189.

    Google Scholar 

  3. D.P. Clement, Fuzzy Ratings for Computer Security Evaluation, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California at Berkeley (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  4. M. Delgado, J.L. Verdegay and M.A. Vila, A model for linguistic partial information in decision-making problems, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 9 (1994), 365–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. W.M. Dong and et al., Fuzzy computation in risk and decision analysis, Civil Engineering Systems 2 (1986), 201–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. A.O. Esogbue and et al., On the application of fuzzy sets theory to the optimal flood control problem arising in water resources systems, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 48 (1992), 155–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. F.C. Hadipriono, A rule-based fuzzy logic deduction technique for damage assessment of protective structures, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 44 (1991), 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. L.J. Hoffman, E.H. Michelmen and D.P. Clements, SEURAT—Security evaluation and analysis using fuzzy metrics, Proc. of the 1978 National Computer Conference (AFIPS Press, Montvale, New Jersey, 1978 ) 47, 531–540.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Huang Chongfu, Principle of information diffusion, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 91 (1) (1997), 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Huang Chongfu, Concepts and methods of fuzzy risk analysis, Proceedings of the First China-Japan Conference on Risk Assessment and Manage-ment,Beijing, China, November, 1998, 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Huang Chongfu and Shi Peijun, Fuzzy risk and calculation, Proceedings of 18th International Conference of the North American Fuzzy Information Processing Society, (1999), 90–94

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Jablonowski, Fuzzy risk analysis: using AI system, AI Expert, 9 (12) (1994), 34–37.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Huang Chongfu, Fuzzy risk assessment of urban natural hazards, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 83 (1996), 271–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. E.E. Kerre, Fuzzy Sets and Approximate Reasoning (Xian Jiaotong University Press, Xian, China, 1999 ).

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. V. Kolluru, S. M. Bartell, R.M., Pitblado, and R. S. Stricoff, Risk Assessment and Management Handbook for Environmental, Health, and Safety Professionals ( McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996 )

    Google Scholar 

  16. A.V. Machias and G.D. Skikos, Fuzzy risk index of wind sites, IEEE Trans. Energy Conversion, 7 (4) (1992), 638–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. A.P. Sage and E.B. White,Methodologies for risk and hazard assessment: a survey and status report, IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-10(8)(1980), 425–446.

    Google Scholar 

  18. K.J. Schmucker, Fuzzy Sets, Natural Language Computations, and Risk Analysis (Computer Science Press, Rockvill, Maryland, 1984 )

    Google Scholar 

  19. L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Information and Control, 8 (3) (1965), 338–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. L.A. Zadeh, Toward a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 90 (2) (1971), 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. L.A. Zadeh, Toward a restructuring of the foundations of fuzzy logic (FL), Proceedings of FUZZ-IEEE’98, Anchorage, USA, May, 1998, 1676–1677.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Huang, C. (2001). Fuzzy Risk Analysis Vs. Probability Risk Analysis. In: Ruan, D., Kacprzyk, J., Fedrizzi, M. (eds) Soft Computing for Risk Evaluation and Management. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 76. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1814-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1814-7_3

  • Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-00348-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-1814-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics