Risk Analysis

, Volume 19, Issue 6, pp 1205–1214

On Modeling Correlated Random Variables in Risk Assessment

  • Charles N. Haas
Article

Abstract

Monte Carlo methods in risk assessment are finding increasingly widespread application. With the recognition that inputs may be correlated, the incorporation of such correlations into the simulation has become important. Most implementations rely upon the method of Iman and Conover for generating correlated random variables. In this work, alternative methods using copulas are presented for deriving correlated random variables. It is further shown that the particular algorithm or assumption used may have a substantial effect on the output results, due to differences in higher order bivariate moments.

Monte Carlo correlation copulas bivariate distributions dioxins 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    David Vose, Quantitative Risk Analysis: A Guide to Monte Carlo Simulation Modelling (John Wiley, New York, 1996).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. E. Burmaster and P. D. Anderson, ''Principles of Good Practice for the Use of Monte Carlo Techniques in Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment,'' Risk Analysis 14(4), 477–481 (1994).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andrew E. Smith, P. Barry Ryan, and John S. Evans, ''The Effect of Neglecting Correlations When Propagating Uncertainty and Estimating the Population Distribution of Risk,'' Risk Analysis 12(4), 467–474 (1992).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    John Bukowski, Leo Korn, and Daniel Wartenberg, ''Correlated Inputs in Quantitative Risk Assessment: The Effects of Distributional Shape,'' Risk Analysis 15(2), 215–219 (1995).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    David E. Burmaster and E. A. Crouch, ''Lognormal Distributions for Body Weight as a Function of Age for Males and Females in the United States, 1976–1980,'' Risk Analysis 17(4), 499–505 (1997).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. M. Roseberry and D.E. Burmaster, ''Log-Normal Distributions for Water Intake by Children and Adults,'' Risk Analysis 12(1), 99–104 (1992).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Hattis and D. E. Burmaster, ''Assessment of Variability and Uncertainty Distributions for Practical Risk Analyses,'' Risk Analysis 14(5), 713–730 (1994). both reviewers and the editor for their useful and constructive suggestions.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ronald L. Iman and W. J. Conover, ''A Distribution-Free Approach to Inducing Rank Correlation Among Input Variables,'' Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation 11(3), 311–334 (1982).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. N. Haas, ''Importance of Distributional Form in Characterizing Inputs to Monte Carlo Risk Assessment,'' Risk Analysis 17(1), 107–113 (1997).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Genest and R. MacKay, ''The Joy of Copulas,'' American Statistician 40, 280–283 (1986).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. W. Frees and E. A. Valdez, ''Understanding Relationships Using Copulas,'' North American Actuarial Journal 2(1), 1–25 (1998).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. Joe, Multivariate Models and Dependence Concepts (Chapman & Hall, London, 1997).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Stuart and J. K. Ord, Kendall's Advanced Theory of Statistics, 5th edition ed. (Oxford University Press, New York, 1987).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Norman L. Johnson, Samuel Kotz, and N. Balakrishnan, Continuous Univariate Distributions, 2nd ed. (Wiley Interscience, New York, 1994).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Christian Genest and Louis-Paul Rivest, ''Statistical Inference Procedures for Bivariate Archimedean Copulas,'' Journal of the American Statistical Association 88(423), 1034–1043 (1993).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    T. P. Hutchinson and C. D. Lai, Continuous Bivariate Distributions, Emphasizing Applications (Rumsby Scientific Publishing, Adelaide, Australia, 1990).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Harry Joe, ''Parametric Families of Multivariate Distributions with Given Marginals,'' Journal of Multivariate Analysis 46, 262–282 (1993).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    C. Genest, ''Frank's Family of Bivariate Distributions,'' Biometrika 74, 549–555 (1987).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. J. Frank, R. B. Nelson, and B. Schweizer, ''Best-possible Bounds for the Distribution of a Sum—A Problem of Kolmogorov,'' Probability Theory and Related Fields 74, 199–211 (1987).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robert T. Clemen and T. Reilly, ''Correlations and Copulas for Decision and Risk Analysis,'' Management Science (in press).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. N. Jouini and Robert T. Clemen, ''Copula Models for Aggregating Expert Opinion,'' Operations Research 44(3), 444–457 (1996).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    The Math Works Inc., MATLAB (Natick, MA, 1994).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. Cunnane, ''Unbiased Plotting Positions: A Review,'' Journal of Hydrology 37, 223–239 (1978).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    J. Brainard and D. E. Burmaster, ''Bivariate Distributions for Height and Weight of Men and Women in the United States,'' Risk Analysis 12(2), 267–275 (1992).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    George R. Mackenzie, ''Approximately Maximum Entropy Multivariate Distributions with Specified Marginals and Pairwise Correlations,'' PhD Dissertation, University of Oregon, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Risk Analysis 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charles N. Haas
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Environmental Science, Engineering & Policy, Drexel UniversityPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations