Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

15.5K
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
15.5K
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

11.5K
Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
11.5K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.1K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.1K
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.5K
The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this...
1.5K
Distribution Reliability and Automation01:25

Distribution Reliability and Automation

522
Distribution reliability in electrical power systems is critical for ensuring an uninterrupted power supply to consumers at minimal cost. According to IEEE Standard Terms, reliability is the probability that a device will function without failure over a specified time period or amount of usage. For electric power distribution, this translates to maintaining continuous power supply and addressing customer concerns over power outages. Several indices, as defined by IEEE Standard 1366-2012, are...
522
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

108.7K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
108.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Asteroid Risk Assessment: A Probabilistic Approach.

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis·2015
Same author

Bayesian assessment of overtriage and undertriage at a level I trauma centre.

Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences·2008
Same author

Early technology assessment of new medical devices.

International journal of technology assessment in health care·2008
Same author

Engineering risk analysis of a hospital oxygen supply system.

Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making·2006
Same author

On the limitations of redundancies in the improvement of system reliability.

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis·2005
Same author

Human and organizational factors in reliability assessment and management of offshore structures.

Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis·2002

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 18, 2026

Simulation of a Scaled Assembly Process with Collaboration of a Robotic Arm and Monitoring through a Vision System for Quality Control
05:47

Simulation of a Scaled Assembly Process with Collaboration of a Robotic Arm and Monitoring through a Vision System for Quality Control

Published on: August 29, 2025

474

Management Errors and System Reliability: A Probabilistic Approach and Application to Offshore Platforms.

M Elisabeth Paté-Cornell1, Robert G Bea1

  • 1Department of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305.Department of Civil Engineering and Department of Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720.

Risk Analysis : an Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis
|November 15, 2017
PubMed
Summary

Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) reveals that management and organizational factors, not just technical issues, drive system failures. Improving design reviews is more effective for offshore platform safety than structural reinforcement.

Keywords:
PRAmanagementoffshore platformsorganizationprobability

More Related Videos

Design and Application of a Fault Detection Method Based on Adaptive Filters and Rotational Speed Estimation for an Electro-Hydrostatic Actuator
06:45

Design and Application of a Fault Detection Method Based on Adaptive Filters and Rotational Speed Estimation for an Electro-Hydrostatic Actuator

Published on: October 28, 2022

2.2K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 18, 2026

Simulation of a Scaled Assembly Process with Collaboration of a Robotic Arm and Monitoring through a Vision System for Quality Control
05:47

Simulation of a Scaled Assembly Process with Collaboration of a Robotic Arm and Monitoring through a Vision System for Quality Control

Published on: August 29, 2025

474
Design and Application of a Fault Detection Method Based on Adaptive Filters and Rotational Speed Estimation for an Electro-Hydrostatic Actuator
06:45

Design and Application of a Fault Detection Method Based on Adaptive Filters and Rotational Speed Estimation for an Electro-Hydrostatic Actuator

Published on: October 28, 2022

2.2K

Area of Science:

  • Engineering
  • Risk Management
  • Offshore Structures

Background:

  • Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) typically identifies technical malfunctions and operator errors as direct causes of system failure.
  • Component failures and operator errors are often linked to underlying management decisions and organizational factors.
  • Traditional PRA often assumes systems are designed and constructed to specifications, potentially overlooking deeper systemic issues.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To extend PRA by incorporating management and organizational factors for more effective risk management.
  • To realistically assess overall failure probabilities by considering a broader range of error scenarios.
  • To evaluate the efficiency of design review improvements versus structural reinforcement for offshore platform safety.

Main Methods:

  • Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) focused on identifying failure modes.
  • Linking PRA inputs to decisions and errors across platform design, construction, and operation phases.
  • Assessing the contribution of various error scenarios to overall platform failure probability.

Main Results:

  • For jacket-type offshore platforms, scenarios involving loads exceeding design specifications contribute only about 5% to the failure probability.
  • Management decisions and organizational factors significantly influence component failures and operator errors.
  • Improving the design review process offers a more cost-efficient method for enhancing system safety compared to structural reinforcement.

Conclusions:

  • Effective risk management requires analyzing management and organizational factors alongside technical ones.
  • Over-reliance on design load scenarios in PRA can lead to an incomplete understanding of failure causes.
  • Investing in design review improvements presents a more efficient strategy for increasing the safety of offshore platforms.