Human Reliability Analysis in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry [electronic resource] : A Comparison of Atomistic and Holistic Methods
- Washington, D.C. : United States. Dept. of Energy, 2005. and Oak Ridge, Tenn. : Distributed by the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, U.S. Dept. of Energy.
- Additional Creators:
- Idaho National Laboratory, United States. Department of Energy, and United States. Department of Energy. Office of Scientific and Technical Information
- Restrictions on Access:
- Free-to-read Unrestricted online access
- A variety of methods have been developed to generate human error probabilities for use in the US nuclear power industry. When actual operations data are not available, it is necessary for an analyst to estimate these probabilities. Most approaches, including THERP, ASEP, SLIM-MAUD, and SPAR-H, feature an atomistic approach to characterizing and estimating error. The atomistic approach is based on the notion that events and their causes can be decomposed and individually quantified. In contrast, in the holistic approach, such as found in ATHEANA, the analysis centers on the entire event, which is typically quantified as an indivisible whole. The distinction between atomistic and holistic approaches is important in understanding the nature of human reliability analysis quantification and the utility and shortcomings associated with each approach.
- Published through SciTech Connect., 09/01/2005., "inl/con-05-00424", Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Meeting,Orlando, FL,09/26/2005,09/30/2005., and Jeffrey C. Joe; Julie L. Marble; David I. Gertman; Ronald L. Boring.
- Funding Information:
View MARC record | catkey: 14346846