Gå til innholdScholarGate
BibliotekMitt bibliotekPultenReview StudioAssistent
Logg inn
Average Annual Loss Estimation/Bevis
Metodebevisregister

Average Annual Loss Estimation

Average annual loss (AAL) estimation computes the expected loss per year from a hazard, the long-run mean of annual losses obtained by weighting every possible event's loss by its annual frequency. It is the single most important summary statistic produced by probabilistic risk and catastrophe models, equal both to the frequency-weighted sum of event losses and to the area under the loss exceedance curve. Patricia Grossi and Howard Kunreuther's 2005 volume sets out how AAL and the exceedance curve are derived and used in risk management, and Vitor Silva and colleagues' 2020 global seismic risk model reports AAL (and AAL ratios) as its headline risk metric across the world. Because it is an expected value, AAL is additive across assets, perils, and regions, which makes it ideal for ranking risk, setting the technical (pure) insurance premium, and screening mitigation. Unlike return-period losses it says nothing about the tail, so it is the complement to probable maximum loss rather than a substitute. Estimating it correctly means handling both frequencies and the full range of event losses, including rare severe ones.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegister

Siteringer kopiert ordrett fra metodens kilderegister. Ingen påstandsnivåverifisering er underforstått fra dem.

Average Annual Loss Estimation (Expected Annualized Loss from a Risk Model)
Taksonomisk metoderegister · process-pipeline / disaster-studies
  • Grossi, P., & Kunreuther, H. (Eds.) (2005). Catastrophe Modeling: A New Approach to Managing Risk. Springer. · ISBN 9780387241050
  • Silva, V., Amo-Oduro, D., Calderon, A., Costa, C., Dabbeek, J., Despotaki, V., et al. (2020). Development of a global seismic risk model. Earthquake Spectra, 36(1_suppl), 372-394. · DOI 10.1177/8755293019899953
Åpne full metode

Kuraterte påstander

Påstander lagret i bevishovedboken, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterte påstander ennå

Denne visningen finner ikke opp en påstandsvurdering når hovedboken ikke har noen.

Relaterte metoder

Generert fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinforslåtte relasjoner – ingen bevispåstand er underforstått.

Same method familyCatastrophe Risk Modelingmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyExposure Modeling (Disaster Risk)machine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyHAZUS Loss Estimationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Taxonomic bucketProbable Maximum Loss Estimationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

2 registrerte siteringer, kopiert fra metodens kilderegister.

Handlinger

Åpne metodeside
ScholarGate

Et innholdsfokusert oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder — hva hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åpne data (CC-BY)

Oppdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søk i metoder…
  • Bla etter fagfelt
  • Fagfelt
  • Reise
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Referanse

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodikk
  • Filosofi

Arbeidsområde

  • Mitt bibliotek
  • Pulten
  • Chat

Selskap

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Oppføringene er sammenstilt fra publiserte kilder til referansebruk. Å kontrollere at informasjonen er korrekt og egnet for ditt eget bruk, er fremdeles ditt eget ansvar.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et oppslagsbibliotek for forskningsmetoder
  • Personvern
  • Informasjonskapsler
  • Vilkår
  • Slett konto