• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Reliability Engineering & System Safety >Looking for errors of omission and commission or The Hunting of the Snark revisited
【24h】

Looking for errors of omission and commission or The Hunting of the Snark revisited

机译：寻找遗漏和委托的错误或重新审视《蛇的狩猎》

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Since the early 1990s, considerable effort has been spent to understand what is meant by an "error of commission" (EOC), to complement the traditional notion of an "error of omission" (EOO). This paper argues that the EOO-EOC dyad, as an artefact of the PSA event tree, is insufficient for human reliability analysis (HRA) for several reasons: (1) EOO-EOC fail to distinguish between manifestation and cause; (2) EOO-EOC refer to classes of incorrect actions rather than to specific instances; (3) there is no unique was of classifying an event using EOO-EOC; (4) the set of error modes that cannot reasonably be classified as EOO is too diverse to fit into any single category of its own.
机译：自1990年代初以来，已花费大量的努力来理解“委托错误”（EOC）的含义，以补充传统的“遗漏错误”（EOO）的概念。本文认为，作为PSA事件树的伪像的EOO-EOC二元组不足以用于人类可靠性分析（HRA），原因有以下几个方面：（1）EOO-EOC无法区分表现形式和原因。 （2）EOO-EOC指的是不正确的行为类别，而不是特定的情况； （3）没有使用EOO-EOC对事件进行分类的唯一方法； （4）不能合理地归类为EOO的错误模式集过于多样化，无法适合其自身的任何单一类别。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号