Modelling the system behaviour of wet snow avalanches using an expert system approach for risk management on high alpine traffic roads

The presented approach describes a model for a rule-based expert system calculating the temporal variability of the release of wet snow avalanches, using the assumption of avalanche triggering without the loading of new snow. The knowledge base of the model is created by using investigations on the system behaviour of wet snow avalanches in the Italian Ortles Alps, and is represented by a fuzzy logic rule-base. Input parameters of the expert system are numerical and linguistic variables, measurable meteorological and topographical factors and observable characteristics of the snow cover. Output of the inference method is the quantified release disposition for wet snow avalanches. Combining topographical parameters and the spatial interpolation of the calculated release disposition a hazard index map is dynamically generated. Furthermore, the spatial and temporal variability of damage potential on roads exposed to wet snow avalanches can be quantified, expressed by the number of persons at risk. The application of the rule base to the available data in the study area generated plausible results. The study demonstrates the potential for the application of expert systems and fuzzy logic in the field of natural hazard monitoring and risk management.

Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Computational Risk Analysis.

BACKGROUND Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a noninvasive breast lesion with uncertain risk for invasive progression. Usual care (UC) for DCIS consists of treatment upon diagnosis, thus potentially overtreating patients with low propensity for progression. One strategy to reduce overtreatment is active surveillance (AS), whereby DCIS is treated only upon detection of invasive disease. Our goal was to perform a quantitative evaluation of outcomes following an AS strategy for DCIS. METHODS Age-stratified, 10-year disease-specific cumulative mortality (DSCM) for AS was calculated using a computational risk projection model based upon published estimates for natural history parameters, and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data for outcomes. AS projections were compared with the DSCM for patients who received UC. To quantify the propagation of parameter uncertainty, a 95% projection range (PR) was computed, and sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS Under the assumption that AS cannot outperform UC, the projected median differences in 10-year DSCM between AS and UC when diagnosed at ages 40, 55, and 70 years were 2.6% (PR = 1.4%-5.1%), 1.5% (PR = 0.5%-3.5%), and 0.6% (PR = 0.0%-2.4), respectively. Corresponding median numbers of patients needed to treat to avert one breast cancer death were 38.3 (PR = 19.7-69.9), 67.3 (PR = 28.7-211.4), and 157.2 (PR = 41.1-3872.8), respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that the parameter with greatest impact on DSCM was the probability of understaging invasive cancer at diagnosis. CONCLUSION AS could be a viable management strategy for carefully selected DCIS patients, particularly among older age groups and those with substantial competing mortality risks. The effectiveness of AS could be markedly improved by reducing the rate of understaging.