Abstract
This paper presents some of the results of a project sponsored by the UK Railway Safety and Standards Board (RSSB). An earlier statistical evaluation of a previous version of the RSSB Safety Risk Model (SRM), a combined Fault/Event Tree, conducted by Prof Andrew Evans had concluded that the model was unduly pessimistic. We have constructed a hypothesis test based on the relative likelihood techniques using the most recent version of the SRM as the null hypothesis. The results support the SRM being consistent with the historical data. Two significant differences between these two studies are the statistical methods employed to support the analysis and the removal of certain significant conservative assumptions from updating the versions of the SRM.
The paper discusses the demands that different model purposes place on these models, and explores the question of whether or not it is meaningful to compare their outputs. The use of expected fatalities as a metric for expressing risk in both models is questioned because of the heavy-tailed form of the distribution for fatality numbers given a fatal accident.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
RSSB 2003 Q3 2002/03 Safety Performance Report, downloadable from http: //www.railwaysafety.org.uk/q3spr0203.asp
Evans ‘Fatal train accidents on Britain’s mainline railways’ J. Royal Statistical Society A 163, 99–119, 2000.
Evans ‘Fatal train accidents on Britain’s main line railways: end of 2001 analysis’ Centre for Transport Studies, University College London, 2002.
Mehlhorn K. Data structures and algorithms, vol 1, Sorting and searching. Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1984
de Kleer J. An assumption-based TMS. Artificial Intelligence 1986; 28: 127–162
Kalbfleisch J and Prentice R The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data, Wiley 2002
Davison A and Hinkley D Bootstrap Methods and Their Applications, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag London
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bedford, T., Quigley, J., French, S. (2004). A Comparison of Data-Driven and Model-Based Approaches to Quantifying Railway Risk. In: Spitzer, C., Schmocker, U., Dang, V.N. (eds) Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-410-4_443
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-410-4_443
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-1057-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-410-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive