1. Panel discussion on the future of software in support of microbial risk assessment

2. A simple example to stimulate discussion: The Environmental Decision Support System for emerging pathogens

3. The role of formal decision software Improve the ability to understand lines of reasoning Assist in assembling and interpreting complex information Ensure paths not taken are considered Allow formal uncertainty and sensitivity analyses Identify gaps in knowledge; guide research Organize multidisciplinary groups

4. The EDSS follows standard risk assessment steps

5. Steps of Assessment; points of intervention

6. Judgments and results can be: Fully quantitative (e.g. 0.01 probability of infection, disease, etc) Semi-quantitative (e.g. a 3 out of 10) Qualitative but categorical (e.g. medium) Qualitative and textual

7. Hazard identification logic tree

8. Exposure assessment logic tree

9. Includes modeling of treatment efficacy

10. Includes modeling of microbial re- growth in distribution system

11. Exposure-response logic tree

12. Includes modeling of exposure-response

13. Uncertainty in relative measure of risk is assessed in CrystalBall

14. Data are assembled and judged in the basement

15. Possible judgments of evidence must be defined clearly

16. The tasks

17. Does such software increase transparency, or does it make the assessments too technical for the decision-maker to follow? Does it improve assessments by structuring the process of reasoning, or would this occur in the absence of software? Does it properly reflect the scientific basis of assessments, or must it be improved significantly to meet this goals? Is it useful in decision-making, or is it only a research tool? In 5 and 10 years, what will be the capabilities of such software? Can such software be transferred to developing countries to assist with risk assessment needs, or will the scientific information needed to use the software be unavailable? The panels questions: