Quantifying Uncertainty in Risk Assessment using Fuzzy Theory
Authors: Hengameh Fakhravar
Abstract: Risk specialists are trying to understand risk better and use complex models for risk assessment, while many risks are not yet well understood. The lack of empirical data and complex causal and outcome relationships make it difficult to estimate the degree to which certain risk types are exposed. Traditional risk models are based on classical set theory. In comparison, fuzzy logic models are built on fuzzy set theory and are useful for analyzing risks with insufficient knowledge or inaccurate data. Fuzzy logic systems help to make large-scale risk management frameworks more simple. For risks that do not have an appropriate probability model, a fuzzy logic system can help model the cause and effect relationships, assess the level of risk exposure, rank key risks in a consistent way, and consider available data and experts'opinions. Besides, in fuzzy logic systems, some rules explicitly explain the connection, dependence, and relationships between model factors. This can help identify risk mitigation solutions. Resources can be used to mitigate risks with very high levels of exposure and relatively low hedging costs. Fuzzy set and fuzzy logic models can be used with Bayesian and other types of method recognition and decision models, including artificial neural networks and decision tree models. These developed models have the potential to solve difficult risk assessment problems. This research paper explores areas in which fuzzy logic models can be used to improve risk assessment and risk decision making. We will discuss the methodology, framework, and process of using fuzzy logic systems in risk assessment.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Look for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.