风险信息价值的度量。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2024-12-22 DOI:10.1111/risa.17694
Antonis Targoutzidis
{"title":"风险信息价值的度量。","authors":"Antonis Targoutzidis","doi":"10.1111/risa.17694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Information is crucial for risk management; however, no quantified measure to evaluate risk information exists to date. The standard measure of value of factual information is information entropy-that is, the negative logarithm of probability. Despite its applications in various fields, this measure is insufficient for the evaluation of risk information; there are three reasons. First, it requires precise probabilities, which are generally absent in the context of risks. Second, it does not consider the effect of the consequences, which is essential for risks. Third, it does not account for human preferences and subjectivity. This study proposes a quantified measure for the evaluation of factual risk information-that is, observations of occurrence, particularly for binary, unambiguous, and rare phenomena. To develop such a measure, precise probabilities are replaced with updated probabilities, based on the Prospective Reference Theory. Additionally, utility is included as a proxy for the size of consequences. The third challenge-human preferences and subjectivity-is partly addressed by the application of updated perceived probabilities and utility as a measure of human preferences. Such a conventional, quantified measure facilitates the comparison of the potential impact of different messages for a new observation of occurrence for a risk, as well as of messages for different risks. Moreover, it clarifies the factors that systematically affect this impact. More particularly, it indicates the major effects of the perceived number of past occurrences.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A measure of information value for risk.\",\"authors\":\"Antonis Targoutzidis\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/risa.17694\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Information is crucial for risk management; however, no quantified measure to evaluate risk information exists to date. The standard measure of value of factual information is information entropy-that is, the negative logarithm of probability. Despite its applications in various fields, this measure is insufficient for the evaluation of risk information; there are three reasons. First, it requires precise probabilities, which are generally absent in the context of risks. Second, it does not consider the effect of the consequences, which is essential for risks. Third, it does not account for human preferences and subjectivity. This study proposes a quantified measure for the evaluation of factual risk information-that is, observations of occurrence, particularly for binary, unambiguous, and rare phenomena. To develop such a measure, precise probabilities are replaced with updated probabilities, based on the Prospective Reference Theory. Additionally, utility is included as a proxy for the size of consequences. The third challenge-human preferences and subjectivity-is partly addressed by the application of updated perceived probabilities and utility as a measure of human preferences. Such a conventional, quantified measure facilitates the comparison of the potential impact of different messages for a new observation of occurrence for a risk, as well as of messages for different risks. Moreover, it clarifies the factors that systematically affect this impact. More particularly, it indicates the major effects of the perceived number of past occurrences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk Analysis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.17694\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.17694","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

信息对风险管理至关重要;然而,目前还没有量化的方法来评估风险信息。事实信息价值的标准度量是信息熵,即概率的负对数。虽然在各个领域都有应用,但对于风险信息的评价还存在不足;原因有三。首先,它需要精确的概率,而这在风险的背景下通常是不存在的。其次,它没有考虑后果的影响,这是风险所必需的。第三,它没有考虑到人的偏好和主观性。本研究提出了一种量化的评估事实风险信息的方法,即对发生情况的观察,特别是对二元的、明确的和罕见的现象。为了开发这样的测量方法,精确的概率被基于前瞻性参考理论的更新概率所取代。此外,效用作为结果大小的代理。第三个挑战——人类偏好和主观性——通过应用更新的感知概率和效用来衡量人类偏好,部分地解决了这一问题。这种传统的、量化的度量有助于比较不同信息对一种风险发生的新观察的潜在影响,以及不同风险的信息。此外,本文还系统地阐明了影响这种影响的因素。更具体地说,它表明了感知到的过去事件数量的主要影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A measure of information value for risk.

Information is crucial for risk management; however, no quantified measure to evaluate risk information exists to date. The standard measure of value of factual information is information entropy-that is, the negative logarithm of probability. Despite its applications in various fields, this measure is insufficient for the evaluation of risk information; there are three reasons. First, it requires precise probabilities, which are generally absent in the context of risks. Second, it does not consider the effect of the consequences, which is essential for risks. Third, it does not account for human preferences and subjectivity. This study proposes a quantified measure for the evaluation of factual risk information-that is, observations of occurrence, particularly for binary, unambiguous, and rare phenomena. To develop such a measure, precise probabilities are replaced with updated probabilities, based on the Prospective Reference Theory. Additionally, utility is included as a proxy for the size of consequences. The third challenge-human preferences and subjectivity-is partly addressed by the application of updated perceived probabilities and utility as a measure of human preferences. Such a conventional, quantified measure facilitates the comparison of the potential impact of different messages for a new observation of occurrence for a risk, as well as of messages for different risks. Moreover, it clarifies the factors that systematically affect this impact. More particularly, it indicates the major effects of the perceived number of past occurrences.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信