The effect of neglecting correlations when propagating uncertainty and estimating the population distribution of risk.

Interest in examining both the uncertainty and variability in environmental health risk assessments has led to increased use of methods for propagating uncertainty. While a variety of approaches have been described, the advent of both powerful personal computers and commercially available simulation software have led to increased use of Monte Carlo simulation. Although most analysts and regulators are encouraged by these developments, some are concerned that Monte Carlo analysis is being applied uncritically. The validity of any analysis is contingent on the validity of the inputs to the analysis. In the propagation of uncertainty or variability, it is essential that the statistical distribution of input variables are properly specified. Furthermore, any dependencies among the input variables must be considered in the analysis. In light of the potential difficulty in specifying dependencies among input variables, it is useful to consider whether there exist rules of thumb as to when correlations can be safely ignored (i.e., when little overall precision is gained by an additional effort to improve upon an estimation of correlation). We make use of well-known error propagation formulas to develop expressions intended to aid the analyst in situations wherein normally and lognormally distributed variables are linearly correlated.

[1]  Jay D. Johnson,et al.  Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis of a dry containment test problem for the MAEROS aerosol model , 1989 .

[2]  K. Pearson Mathematical Contributions to the Theory of Evolution. III. Regression, Heredity, and Panmixia , 1896 .

[3]  R. Iman,et al.  A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables , 1982 .

[4]  K M Thompson,et al.  Monte Carlo techniques for quantitative uncertainty analysis in public health risk assessments. , 1992, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[5]  R. Spear,et al.  Integrating uncertainty and interindividual variability in environmental risk assessment. , 1987, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  G. Apostolakis,et al.  Pitfalls in risk calculations , 1981 .

[7]  Max Henrion,et al.  The Propagation and Analysis of Uncertainty , 1990 .

[8]  J. C. Helton,et al.  An Investigation of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis Techniques for Computer Models , 1988 .

[9]  Qin Zhang A general method dealing with correlations in uncertainty propagation in fault trees , 1989 .

[10]  D. Burmaster,et al.  Bivariate distributions for height and weight of men and women in the United States. , 1992, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[11]  T E McKone,et al.  Uncertainties in health-risk assessment: an integrated case study based on tetrachloroethylene in California groundwater. , 1992, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[12]  Max Henrion,et al.  Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis , 1990 .

[13]  N C Hawkins Conservatism in maximally exposed individual (MEI) predictive exposure assessments: a first-cut analysis. , 1991, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[14]  R. Iman,et al.  Rank correlation plots for use with correlated input variables , 1982 .

[15]  D. C. Cox,et al.  Methods for Uncertainty Analysis: A Comparative Survey , 1981 .

[16]  D. Stoller,et al.  On the Generation of Normal Random Vectors , 1962 .

[17]  F. A. Seiler,et al.  Error Propagation for Large Errors , 1987 .