This work provides a comprehensive uncertainty technique to evaluate uncertainty, resulting in a more realistic evaluation of PI, thereby requiring fewer resources to address scenarios and allowing resources to be used across more scenarios. For a given set of dversary resources, two types of uncertainty are associated with PI for a scenario: (1) aleatory (random) uncertainty for detection probabilities and time delays and (2) epistemic (state of knowledge) uncertainty for the adversary resources applied during an attack. Adversary esources consist of attributes (such as equipment and training) and knowledge about the security system; to date, most evaluations have assumed an adversary with very high resources, adding to the conservatism in the evaluation of PI. The aleatory uncertainty in PI is ddressed by assigning probability distributions to detection probabilities and time delays. A numerical sampling technique is used to evaluate PI, addressing the repeated variable dependence in the equation for PI.
[1]
John L. Darby.
LinguisticBelief: a java application for linguistic evaluation using belief, fuzzy sets, and approximate reasoning.
,
2007
.
[2]
John L. Darby.
Evaluation of risk from acts of terrorism :the adversary/defender model using belief and fuzzy sets.
,
2006
.
[3]
Susan Snedakar.
Vulnerability Assessment Tools
,
2007
.
[4]
Glenn Shafer,et al.
A Mathematical Theory of Evidence
,
2020,
A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.
[5]
T. Greening.
Matter
,
1995
.
[6]
R. A. Al-Ayat,et al.
An overview of ASSESS-analytic system and software for evaluating safeguards and security
,
1989
.
[7]
M. P. Lee,et al.
Branch technical position on the use of expert elicitation in the high-level radioactive waste program
,
1996
.
[8]
S. Kaplan,et al.
On The Quantitative Definition of Risk
,
1981
.