S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision Conferencing in Nuclear Emergency Management by Raimo P. Hämäläinen Mats Lindstedt.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

S T U K S Ä T E I L Y T U R V A K E S K U S S T R Å L S Ä K E R H E T S C E N T R A L E N R A D I A T I O N A N D N U C L E A R S A F E T Y A U T H O R.

Advertisements

Dynamite In Control of My Future. A chance to learn first No commitment to ‘taking control’ at the end of the project A real chance to think about how.

Ken KUSUKAMI Director Safety Research Laboratory Research and Development Center of JR East Group East Japan Railway Company Development of human factors.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 We have the tools How to attract the people? Creating a culture of Web-based participation.

FROM GAPS TO CAPS Risk Management Capability on Gaps Identification in the BSR Neringa Brogaitė-Karvelienė Fire and Rescue Department under MoI of Lithuania.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology A Preference Programming Approach to Make the Even Swaps Method Even Easier Jyri Mustajoki.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision Support for the Even Swaps Process with Preference Programming Jyri Mustajoki Raimo.

Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology e-Learning Negotiation Analysis Harri Ehtamo Raimo P Hämäläinen Ville Koskinen Systems Analysis.

Business Continuity and You! The Ohio State University Business & Finance Enterprise Continuity Program Quarterly Update October 2008Business and Finance.

The Effective Board August 2013 How can you refresh your board review? A board effectiveness review every year probably seems too frequent – it all comes.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Using Intervals for Global Sensitivity and Worst Case Analyses in Multiattribute Value Trees.

The user as wizard: A method for early involvement in the design and evaluation of adaptive systems Judith Masthoff University of Aberdeen, Scotland.

ITGS Extended Essay An introduction to IB Year 1 Students by Panagiotis Kafkarkou.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision and Negotiation Support in Multi-Stakeholder Development of Lake Regulation Policy.

CPSC 871 John D. McGregor Module 4 Session 3 Architecture Evaluation.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Ahti Salo and Antti Punkka Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology.

Evacuation in case of large scale flooding in The Netherlands 3 March 2010 Matthijs Kok, Bas Kolen HKV consultants

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Rank-Based Sensitivity Analysis of Multiattribute Value Models Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo.

Emergency Planning Steps 5 steps in emergency planning Step 1: Establish a team Step 2: Analyze capabilities and hazards Step 3: Conduct vulnerability.

Life Cycle of Products Source: Melanen et al Metals flows and recycling of scrap in Finland. The Finnish Environment 401. Finnish Environment Institute,

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Kai Virtanen, Raimo P. Hämäläinen and Ville Mattila Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki.

E-participation Requires Systems Intelligence Paula Siitonen and Raimo P. Hämäläinen Helsinki University of Technology, Systems Analysis Laboratory Marcelo.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology We have the tools How to attract the people? Creating a culture of Web-based participation.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Determining cost-effective portfolios of weapon systems Juuso Liesiö, Ahti Salo and Jussi.

HEA Conference June 22nd – 23rd 2010 Shaping the Future: Future Learning It’s all in the words: the impact of language on the design and development of.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology

1 Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology How to Benefit from Decision Analysis in Environmental Life Cycle Assessment Pauli Miettinen.

Strategies to create change Skills training for CTO staff.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Can We Avoid Biases in Environmental Decision Analysis ? Raimo P. Hämäläinen Helsinki University.

The Creative Problem Solving Pack. The following pages provide separate packs that you can use in the following situations. * Creative problem solving.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Opinions-Online Platform for Global Participation, Voting, Surveys and Group Decisions.

Managing Opportunities Lori A. Clarke Department of Computer Science University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Background Management Council (MC) was briefed on approach in early Feb 2003 and approved it Agreed that every Service Group (SG) will participate in.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Observations from computer- supported Even Swaps experiments using the Smart-Swaps software.

Chapter 6 Decision Trees and Influence Diagrams.

Chapter 14: Using the Scalable Decision Process on Large Projects The process outlined is meant to be scaleable. Individual steps can be removed, changed,

INTERACTION DESIGN PROCESS Textbook: S. Heim, The Resonant Interface: HCI Foundations for Interaction Design [Chapter 3] Addison-Wesley, 2007 February.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Raimo P. Hämäläinen Jyri Mustajoki Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of.

Sessions VI and VII Conclusions and summary Francois Besnus Session Chair Cape Town July 6, 2007.

Project Management IV1021Fö5 Risk Management. Agenda Project Risk Project Risk Management The Risk Management Process Goal: get an understanding of basic.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Practical dominance and process support in the Even Swaps method Jyri Mustajoki Raimo P.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Kai Virtanen, Janne Karelahti, Tuomas Raivio, and Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis.

56th Regular Session of the IAEA General Conference

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING MCS-2 LECTURE # 4. PROTOTYPING PROCESS MODEL  A prototype is an early sample, model or release of a product built to test a concept.

Fukushima Lessons Learnt and Follow-up Activities of Rostechnadzor Alexey Ferapontov, Acting Chairman Second European Nuclear Safety Conference

St. Louis – February 25-28, 2008 Extremely Successful -Close to 500 Participants  Jointly Sponsored by ASFPM & NASMA – Supported by Corps and FEMA High.

Software Architecture Evaluation Methodologies Presented By: Anthony Register.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 1DAS workshop Ahti A. Salo and Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki.

Intervention for Chronic and Emergency Exposure Situations Assessment and Response during Nuclear Emergency Protective Action Decision Making for Severe.

MCDA can be realized in many ways A. Decision makers and experts use MCDA on their own, no stakeholders involved B. Stakeholders opinions are.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Decision Analysis Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Incomplete Ordinal Information in Value Tree Analysis Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo Systems.

Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology An e-Learning module on Negotiation Analysis Harri Ehtamo Raimo P.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Master’s Thesis Antti Punkka “ Uses of Ordinal Preference Information in Interactive Decision.

© 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Chapter 16 Decision Analysis.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 15th MCDM conference - Ankara Mats Lindstedt / 1 Using Intervals for Global.

Preparing Nations, Cities, Organisations and their People Analysis of Operational Plans for Precautionary Evacuation using Decision Theory Paul Kailiponi.

1 Chapter 2 SW Process Models. 2 Objectives  Understand various process models  Understand the pros and cons of each model  Evaluate the applicability.

Decision analysis and risk management: Introduction to course Jouni Tuomisto, THL.

SÄTEILYTURVAKESKUS STRÅLSÄKERHETSCENTRALEN RADIATION AND NUCLEAR SAFETY AUTHORITY Joint Nordic Protection Guidelines for Nuclear and Radiological Emergencies.

Mustajoki, Hämäläinen and Salo Decision support by interval SMART/SWING / 1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision support.

DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE BASE NECESSARY FOR TSO.

PLC Year 2 Day 2 Inquiry Cycle

preference statements

Part 1: The Preparedness Package for Refugee Emergencies (PPRE)

MBA, PhD student Behavioral studies of Decision making

An adversarial risk analysis framework for cybersecurity

Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory

Decision support by interval SMART/SWING Methods to incorporate uncertainty into multiattribute analysis Ahti Salo Jyri Mustajoki Raimo P. Hämäläinen.

Presentation transcript:

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision Conferencing in Nuclear Emergency Management by Raimo P. Hämäläinen Mats Lindstedt Kari Sinkko

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Contents of presentation: background of the study decision conferences at STUK results and conclusions

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology RODOS project a Real-time On-line DecisiOn Support project to develop a group support system for nuclear emergency management sponsored by the European Commission and started in 1990 in Finland STUK (Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority) participates in the project the decision conferences were part of the RODOS project and organized by STUK

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Objectives to study decision conferencing and its suitability in RODOS to study the use of the RODOS software to study the incorporation of uncertainties

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision conferencing refers to intensive, computer supported meetings a group of people develops a shared understanding of a common problem develops a decision analysis model, assisted by a facilitator originally a two-day meeting

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision conferencing here a faster type of decision conferencing was used (a few hours) prestructured value trees or separate decision making groups decision analysis interviews

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Conferences at STUK early phase countermeasures (a few hours after the accident) iodine tablets, sheltering, and evacuation the RODOS software was used to calculate accident data and impacts of countermeasures first phase of the conferences: values and attributes second phase of the conferences: uncertainties participants from STUK and from the Finnish nuclear power companies

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Conferences at STUK

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Conferences at STUK

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Objectives of the first conference to define the factors and attributes important when deciding on countermeasures no uncertainties included

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Problem structuring session Preliminary value tree

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology First decision conference Final value tree

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology First decision conference -the strategies and their impacts

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology First decision conference - weights given by participants

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology First decision conference - rankings 1 2 3

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology uncertainties included it was known that an accident had happened, but it was not known how severe it had been 5%, 50%, and 95% fractiles used three accident scenarios Second decision conference

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference Final value tree

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference-impacts

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference - eliciting utility functions Lottery question: Please select the number of cancer incidents (L) that would make you indifferent between getting that amount for sure and a fifty-fifty chance of getting 250 cancer incidents or 0 incidents.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference - utility functions

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference - weights

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference Ranking with SMART Ranking with Tradeoff

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Second decision conference - ranking with SMART (95% fractile)

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Observations the decision conferencing format was successful a lot of progress was made in just a few hours, with more training this method could be used in a real situation using prestructured value trees or benchmarks seems a promising way forward brainstorming was a good way to get the process started the participants were able to agree on the value trees provides a common framework from which to discuss the situation

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Problems the choice of strategies was too limited, the best choice was too obvious the attributes need to be better defined the terminology used needs to be clearer the case assumed a single decision point, in reality sequential decision making would be used the participants did not feel that the weighting of the attributes was very appropriate

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Understanding uncertainties this was found to be very difficult the participants rather focused on the worst case scenario (95% fractile) and ignored the probabilities there was no uncertainty about the accident, if there had been the situation would have been even more difficult

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Conclusions - RODOS software still a prototype, but could have worked better problems with presenting the data using thematic maps does not yet allow what-if analyses the software was not used very much during the conferences the participants felt RODOS could be used to provide data on the accident and to calculate impacts they did not feel RODOS could help in the actual decision making

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology References Hämäläinen, R. P, Leikola, O Spontaneous Decision Conferencing with Top-level Politicians. OR Insights Vol 9, pp Hämäläinen R.P., Sinkko K., Lindstedt M Multi-Attribute Risk Analysis in Nuclear Emergency Management. Risk Analysis, Hämäläinen R.P., Sinkko K., Lindstedt M., Ammann M. and Salo A RODOS and decision conferencing on early phase protective actions in Finland, Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, STUK-A159, December, pp Downloadable at Hämäläinen R.P., Sinkko K., Lindstedt M., Ammann M. and Salo A Decision analysis interviews on protective actions in Finland supported by RODOS system. Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, STUK-A173, February 2000, pp. 57. Also RODOS Report - Decision Support for Nuclear Emergencies, RODOS(WG7)-TN(99)-04. Hämäläinen R.P., Lindstedt M. and Sinkko K Decision analysis interviews in nuclear emergency management. Manuscript. French, S., Finck, R., Hämäläinen, R.P., Naadland, E., Roed, J., Salo, A. and Sinkko K An exercise on clean-up actions in an urban environment after a nuclear accident, Nordic Decision Conference, Sweden, 20-31, August. Hämäläinen R P Computer Assisted Energy Policy Analysis in the Parliament of Finland. Interfaces; 4 (Vol. 18):