On the validation of risk analysis: A commentary

Tony Rosqvist (Corresponding Author)

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    32 Citations (Scopus)


    Aven and Heide (2009) [1] provided interesting views on the reliability and validation of risk analysis. The four validation criteria presented are contrasted with modelling features related to the relative frequency—based and Bayesian approaches to risk analysis. In this commentary I would like to bring forth some issues on validation that partly confirm and partly suggest changes in the interpretation of the introduced validation criteria—especially, in the context of low probability–high consequence systems. The mental model of an expert in assessing probabilities is argued to be a key notion in understanding the validation of a risk analysis.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1261-1265
    Number of pages5
    JournalReliability Engineering and System Safety
    Issue number11
    Publication statusPublished - 2010
    MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed


    • Risk analysis validation
    • Risk-informed decision-making
    • Uncertainties


    Dive into the research topics of 'On the validation of risk analysis: A commentary'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this