Abstract
The limitations of conventional systems of (structural) safety, which are based on the definition: safety: mathematical reliability, are pointed out. In substitution, more general inductive systems are proposed which consider safety as a subjective feeling, inclusive of sociological and psychological conditionings; human judgement is an essential linking element of these systems. The widely documented suboptimality of human inference, when compared with normative rules is considered, and ways are suggested to improve its coherence by using Bayes' theorem in various formulations. Descriptive models of human information processing are also reviewed. The opinion is expressed that inductive models create an appropriate ground on which probabilistic and nonprobabilistic approaches to (structural) safety can be reconciled.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Engineering Issues: Journal of Professional Activities
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
