Title. Fundamentals of programming using Java / Edward Currie. Author. Currie, Edward. Published. London: Thomson Learning, Physical Description. Fundamentals of Programming using Java by Edward Currie; 1 edition; First published in Edward Currie is the author of Fundamentals of Programming Using Java ( avg rating, 22 ratings, 0 reviews, published ), Great Britain ( avg r.
|Language:||English, Spanish, French|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Aimed at students learning how to program for the first time, this is a focused introduction which stands out as an accessible first encounter with. Fundamentals of Programming Using Java (FastTrack) [Edward Currie] on terney.info Aimed at students learning how to program for the first time, this is a focused Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App. Workshops. – Exercises and resources can be downloaded from Wolf. Text book. – Currie, E. (), “Fundamentals of Programming Using Java”,
Because of its interdisciplinary nature and complexity, risk analysis requires an appropriate amount of time to evaluate all pertinent data, even when one deals with problems of lesser complexity. We are constantly performing risk analysis and risk management in everyday situations, such as observing traffic when planning to cross the street or driving. However, in more complex situations where we may be exposed to toxic substances, radiation, or the possibility of a nuclear power plant disaster, formal risk analysis may be necessary in order to derive reasonable and sometimes optimal recommendations for the most appropriate risk management.
The editor and co-authors seek to bridge the gap between theory and application and to create a common basic language of risk analysis.
They hope that the material in this book will provide a common knowledge base for risk analysts, which can be expanded according to their specific interests and fields of study by using the references provided in each chapter.
The co-authors are experienced and recognized practitioners in the various types of risk analysis and risk management. The intended readers are scientists, engineers, lawyers, sociologists, politicians, and anyone interested in gaining an overview of risk analysis, wanting to become proficient in speaking the basic language of risk analysis, and understanding its applications in difficult risk management decisions.
This book can be used as a textbook and reference for undergraduate, graduate, and other training courses in risk analysis. Several chapters demonstrate that application of the most enlightened environmental management increases profits since pollution is equivalent to wasted resources.
Thus, fiscal conservatism and emphasis on private property rights also mean increased environmental protection. Only in an unenlightened society are environmental safeguards mistakenly considered as being opposed to business interests and free markets.
Better business with a cleaner environment is the paradigm for the 21st century. The book is divided into four sections. Section I, Theoretical Background of Risk Analysis consists of chapters demonstrating the scientific basis of risk analysis, types of risk analysis, and basic concepts. Chapters in this section discuss toxic chemicals risk analysis, epidemiological risk analysis, uncertainty and variability of risk analysis, Monte Carlo risk analysis modeling, probabilistic risk analysis of complex technological systems, ecological risk analysis, and the basic economics of risk analysis.
Section II, Applications of Risk Analysis demonstrates applications of risk analysis to real-life situations. Examples come from agriculture application of pesticides , indoors exposures, promoting pollution prevention, global climate change, etc. A chapter on computer software programs and use of the Internet in risk analysis is also added. Section III, Risk Perception, Law, Politics, and Risk Communication deals with differences between public perception of risks, scientific risk analysis and its legal applications, and how to communicate risks to those who may be affected.
This section also has two chapters dealing with setting environmental priorities and comparative risk analysis and environmental justice. The insurability of risk deals with societal response to various risks of living. Section IV, Risk Management illustrates the use of risk analysis in devising better risk management in handling technologies e.
Also, chapters deal with the management of natural risks such as earthquakes and floods and with the cleanup of radioactive hazardous waste sites on an Indian reservation. The final chapter integrates a worldview as seen by a risk analyst Vlasta Molak, the editor. The conclusion summarizes the topics elaborated in the chapters and suggests how the practice of risk analysis affects social management of environmental problems in view of the recent controversies in risk-benefit analysis applications in legislative proposals and regulations in the U.
Around B. Greeks and Romans observed causal relationships between exposure and disease: Hippocrates 4th century B. Modern risk analysis has roots in probability theory and the development of scientific methods for identifying causal links between adverse health effects and different types of hazardous activities: Blaise Pascal introduced the probability theory in ; Edmond Halley proposed life-expectancy tables in ; and in , Pierre Simon de LaPlace developed a true prototype of modern quantitative risk analysis with his calculations of the probability of death with and without smallpox vaccination.
With the rise of capitalism, money use, and interest rates, there was an increased use of mathematical methods dealing with probabilities and risks. For example, the risk of dying was calculated for insurance purposes life-expectancy tables. Physicians in the Middle Ages also observed a correlation between exposures to chemicals or agents and health: John Evelyn — noticed that smoke in London caused respiratory problems.
He also noticed correlation of scrotal cancer with occupational exposures to soot in chimney sweeps. In B. By B. In , the first life insurance policy was issued in England. In contemporary society, insurance has developed to deal with a wide variety of phenomena associated with adverse effects, from health insurance to mortgage insurance. Actuaries people who calculate insurance premia, based on historical losses and estimates of the future income from premiums and losses are probably the best risk assessors, since the failure in making accurate predictions about losses and premia income can result in the loss of the business.
Companies with bad actuaries go bankrupt see Chapter III. Government interventions to deal with natural or manmade hazards are recorded in all great civilizations. In order to manage air pollution from burning coal in London, King Edward issued an order forbidding the use of soft coal in kilns, after an unsuccessful trial to voluntary decrease its use.
Carrots and sticks may be more effective in dealing with environmental and occupational risks accidents or pollution than either sticks or carrots alone! Thus, while we may choose to believe that industries and individuals sincerely have the public good in mind when dealing with industrial production, pollution, and waste management, it is helpful to have laws and regulations to insure responsible behavior in cases where promises are not kept because budgetary constraints have pushed environmental considerations out of the picture.
The irony is that in most cases improvement in environmental management also improves the bottom line in the long run and often in the short run. Water and garbage sanitation in the 19th and 20th centuries were extremely successful in decreasing the risk of mortality and morbidity, so were building and fire codes; boiler testing and inspection; and safety engineering on steamboats, railroads, and cars. A whole field of risk management was developed based on common sense risk analysis, which increased the longevity and generally improved the quality of life for most citizens in the developed world.
Modern industrial society underwent changes that must be factored into risk analysis and management associated with industrial development. In the North, the following applies for modern risks: 1. A shift in the nature of risks from infectious diseases to degenerative diseases 2. New risks such as from nuclear plant accidents, radioactive waste, pesticides and other chemicals releases, oil spills, chemical plant accidents, ozone depletion, acid rain generation, and global warming 3.
Increased ability of scientists to measure contamination 4. Increased number of formal risk analysis procedures capable of predicting a priori risks 5.
Increased role of governments in assessing and managing risks 6. Increased participation of special interest groups in societal risk management industry, workers, environmentalists, and scientific organizations , which increases the necessity for public information 7. Risk analysis can help manage technology in a more rational way and promote sustainability of desirable conditions for societies and eliminate conditions detrimental to the well-being of humans and ecosystems.
However, in each particular case of risk assessment, the assumptions and uncertainties have to be clearly spelled out. All the models used in performing risk analysis have to indicate assumptions and uncertainties in conclusions. Formal risk analysis can be organized into Figure 1 1. Noncancer chemicals risk analysis 2. Carcinogen risk analysis 3. Epidemiological risk analysis which could include both cancer and noncancer chemicals or other nonchemical hazards, such as accidents, electromagnetic radiation, nutrition, etc.
Probabilistic risk analysis associated with nuclear power plant safety and chemical plant safety 5. A posteriori risk analysis, which is applied in actuary science to predict future losses, either from natural phenomena, investments, or technology 6.
Chapters in Section I of this book will deal with these types of risk analyses and their limitations. Figure 1 Schematic representation of the types of risk analysis. For noncarcinogenic chemicals, it is assumed that an adverse effect occurs only if exposure to the chemical exceeds a threshold.
Risk analysis is used both for establishing criteria and standards for chemicals in the environmental media and for evaluating risks in particular cases of exposures to toxic chemicals such as contaminated water, soil, or air in the vicinity of a pollution source or evaluations of Superfund sites. It is assumed that there is no probability of harm if the exposure is below such a threshold.
Criteria are based mostly on animal studies, and risk analysis methods deal with extrapolations from animal to human, from short-range to long-range exposures, and with similar scientific issues that require expert judgments and cannot be neatly put into a formula. Uncertainty in the derived criteria and standards is usually one to two orders of magnitude.
Risk analysis for establishing criteria for toxic substances is probabilistic only in the case of carcinogens. The probability of developing cancer or a cancer potency slope as a result of exposure to a particular level or concentration of a chemical is derived by modeling from animal data. Depending on the model applied, a variety of results may be obtained.
Probabilities of developing cancer or other diseases can also be obtained from epidemiological research correlating exposures to toxic substances with the development of cancer or other types of diseases. Epidemiological risk analysis deals with establishing correlations or causal relationships between exposures to chemicals or physical agents and diseases. Most frequently, retrospective, cohort, and mortality studies of occupational groups are used for assessing cancer risk.
Standard morbidity or mortality ratios can be regarded as an increase in probability of a health risk with exposure.
However, because of the large uncertainty in estimating exposure, the results of the epidemiological studies are combined with studies in animals, in order to confirm the causal relationship between exposures to an agent carcinogen and cancer. Probabilistic risk analysis is applied to industrial process safety and nuclear plant safety fault-tree and failure-tree analysis.
The probability of an adverse outcome failure of a component or a system of a series of interconnected events is obtained by evaluating probabilities of failures of individual components. These probabilities are obtained either based on historical data or on assumptions of failure. Once a probability of failure of a chemical process is established, one can apply chemical risk analysis to establish the severity of consequences of a release of a particular toxic substance.
This type of probabilistic risk analysis was the beginning of the modern discipline of risk analysis, when atomic energy promised a new way of tapping into an almost limitless energy resource. Until Chernobyl see Chapter IV.
Chernobyl and the problems with disposing of radioactive waste from nuclear reactors demonstrated again that the technology that initially promised to be a panacea may not be all that was promised.
Thus, it may be wise to be cautious when promoting technological fixes. Based on historical data, one can establish probabilities of adverse effects from natural phenomena earthquakes, floods, etc. Economic risk analysis also could be regarded as belonging to this category, because adverse economic effects are obtained from known prices of wasted chemicals and other costs associated with pollution cost of cleanup of hazardous waste sites, legal costs, medical costs to society, etc.
Some recent phenomena are not yet quantifiable. For example, risks from acid rain are not yet easily amenable to numerical analysis, neither are the risks from global warming.
Therefore, one can only establish qualitative risks until more data is obtained to perform quantitative risk analysis. However, one should keep in mind that in the study of such complex phenomena we may never have sufficient data for accurate predictions and therefore we must base our risk management decisions on prudence. The reader will notice the wide diversity of definitions and controversy, which indicate that, unlike the physical sciences, there is much uncertainty associated with any risk analysis assessment.
While risk analysis may be a useful tool to evaluate relatively simple risks such as health risks from toxic substances in a particular exposure scenario and to compare them with alternative risks if different human actions were taken e.
Thus, risk analysis should be applied with caution to the real-life problems, keeping in mind its limitations. The caution may be even more critical in risk-benefit analysis, where calculations of benefits may be even more uncertain and dependent on various underlying assumptions see Chapter I. A Nobel Laureate economist, Dr. His assessment of economics could be translated into a cautionary note on risk analysis: There is as much reason to be apprehensive about long-run dangers created in a much wider field, by the uncritical acceptance of assertions which have the appearance of being scientific.
There are definite limits to what we can expect science to achieve. This means that to entrust the science — or to deliberate control according to scientific principles — more than scientific method can achieve may have deplorable effects. This insight will be especially resisted by all who have hoped that our increasing power of prediction and control, generally regarded as the characteristic result of scientific advance, applied to the process of society, would soon enable us to mold it entirely to our liking.
Yet the confidence in the unlimited power of science is only too often based on a false belief that the scientific method consists in the application of a ready-made technique, or in imitating the form rather than the substance of scientific procedure, as if one needed only to follow some cooking recipes to solve all social problems.
The current controversy between industry, government, and environmentalists about the use of risk analysis follows the previous reasoning. While it is true that risk analysis may be used by both sides in an issue to justify their actions, often based on some rather questionable numerical values, risk analysis could be useful to point out the dangers of pursuing one or another course of action.
The most important thing is to always make risk assessment transparent to the public with all the assumptions and parameters clearly stated. The thought process that goes into evaluating a particular hazard is more important than the application of some sophisticated mathematical technique or formula, which often may be based on erroneous assumptions or models of the world. The controversy about the requirement for risk-benefit analysis before any law is enacted may lead the legislators into total regulatory deadlock, which may leave the public unprotected, even in obvious cases of environmental abuse.
Risk analysis can, under some circumstances, make general predictions about the outcome of our decisions; sometimes we can only obtain a very rough feeling about the possible outcomes. While in physical sciences the predictions are usually very accurate, in risk analysis our predictions could have a range of several orders of magnitude.
If we were to build a bridge based on an assumption of the average value obtained for weight put on this bridge and, in reality, the weight may vary for one to two orders of magnitude, we would soon experience collapse if we did not allow ample space for uncertainty and caution. The best we can hope in applying risk analysis to the complex problems that we face today such as environmental exposure to chemicals and radiation, ozone hole, resource depletion, soil loss, global warming, etc.
The numbers derived by risk analysis are at best crude and often misleading, if the uncertainty associated with them is not clearly spelled out. We could compare the risks of different cleaning methods at the hazardous waste sites or the risks of the use of different types of energy or transportation with more certainty than we could predict the global warming phenomena.
Risk analysis can help us predict general economic, ecological, and human health impacts of certain decisions e. Compared with the accurate predictions we can get in the physical sciences, this sort of mere pattern prediction is not satisfying. However, to pretend that we possess the knowledge and power to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge, which in the real world we do NOT possess, is likely to make us do a great deal of harm.
The Silent Spring. Boston, MA. Houghton Mifflin. Covello VT and Mumpower J. Hayek FA. Economic Freedom. Basil Blackwell Ltd. Washington, DC. National Academy Press. Institutional Approaches to Risk Analysis Vlasta Molak SUMMARY Most environmental problems that concern the public deal with exposures to toxic chemicals by inhaling air, by ingestion of water or food, or by dermal exposure originating from chemical or other industries, power plants, road vehicles, agriculture, etc.
There are two types of noncancer chemical risk analysis uses: 1 to derive criteria and standards for various environmental media and 2 to characterize risks posed by a specific exposure scenario e. Usually such exposure scenarios are complex and vary with each individual case, and, thus, methods in risk analysis must be modified to account for all possible exposures in a given situation. Chemical risk analysis used for criteria development generally does not determine the probability of an adverse effect.
Rather, it establishes concentrations of chemicals that could be tolerated by most people in our food, water, or air without experiencing adverse health effects either in short-term or long-term exposures depending on the type of a derived criterion. These levels either concentrations of chemicals in environmental media or total intake of a chemical by one or all routes of exposure are derived by using point estimates of the average consumption of food and drink and body parameters such as weight, skin surface, metabolic rate, etc.
There are numerous criteria and standards established for various chemicals by the U. Since many of them were established before formal risk analysis techniques became available, they are undergoing revision, based on better risk analysis methods.
The exposure assessments could follow a deterministic model by assuming average parameter values air, water, food consumptions, dermal intake, etc. Key Words: toxic, chemicals, hazard, exposure, standard, criteria, dose response, acute, chronic, pollution 1. Hazard identification — identifying potentially toxic chemicals. Dose—response relationships — determining toxic effects depending on amounts ingested, inhaled, or otherwise entering the human organism. These are usually determined from animal studies.
Severity of a particular effect is a function of dose. Exposure assessment — determining the fate of the chemical in the environment and its consumption by humans. Ideally, by performing environmental fate and transport of chemicals, and by evaluating food intakes, inhalation, and possible dermal contacts, one can asses total quantities of toxic chemicals in an exposed individual or population, which may cause adverse health effects.
In criteria derivation, one uses either worse case exposure scenario or most probable exposure scenario and point values for various human parameters. Monte Carlo modeling uses real-world distribution data for those parameters.
Risk characterization consists of evaluating and combining data in Items 2 and 3. For example, reference dose RfD and health advisories for 1-day, day, and subchronic exposures are derived for many chemicals with the use of safety uncertainty factors to protect most individuals. If an actual exposure to environmental pollutant or pollutants exceeds limits set by the criteria, efforts should be made to decrease the concentrations of pollutant. The magnitude of risk can be estimated by comparing the particular exposure to derived criteria or reference doses.
Since the number of chemicals potentially appearing in the environment is large, and the toxicological effects are very complex and differ depending on the chemical and conditions of exposure, it is sometimes difficult to determine how toxic is toxic. Risk analysis helps determine which chemicals are dangerous and under what circumstances. It can also help establish relative risks from various chemicals ranking risks.
If, for example, in a particular industrial setting the derived health risk from pollutant A is higher than from pollutant B, that may indicate that the action should first be taken to decrease the pollution by A. In order to be able to use information on such a large number of substances, the toxicologists have developed classification of chemicals by their acute, subacute, and chronic toxicity Cassarett and Doull LD50 is usually derived from animal studies mice and rats.
Based on that definition, chemicals are divided into toxicity ratings of practically nontoxic, moderately toxic, very toxic, extremely toxic, and supertoxic Table 1. For example, selenium, oxygen, and iron are nontoxic or not even useful at certain doses, but can be lethal at high doses.
Generally, we are concerned with chemicals which are very toxic, extremely toxic, or supertoxic. Long-term exposures to relatively low concentrations of these chemicals can cause specific organ damage or cancer. Therefore, chemicals are also evaluated for their subchronic and chronic systemic toxicity, carcinogenicity potential, or reproductive and developmental toxicity. Data are usually obtained from animal studies and sometimes from epidemiological studies in humans. While for health effects other than cancer a threshold dose is assumed, for cancer it is assumed that any exposure may potentially cause cancer.
However, the probability of getting cancer at low exposure concentrations may be so low as to be of no practical concern. The U. EPA defines negligible risk for cancer as that smaller than ,, U. This is a policy decision and has nothing to do with the science of risk analysis. EPA has used a multistage linear model to establish potency slopes for approximately cancer-causing chemicals, which can serve to establish the risks of pollutants in the air, water, and food U.
EPA a. Since most of these potency slopes are derived from animal data, there is an uncertainty associated with their numerical values. An additional uncertainty is posed by high- to low-dose extrapolation, because animal studies are, for practical reasons, performed at relatively high doses in order to be able to observe effects. With an increasing dose, the percent of affected individuals with the same type of health effect increases.
For noncarcinogens, a threshold dose is assumed which defines a no-observable-effect level NOEL. It is assumed that exposure to a chemical that results in a dose smaller than a threshold is handled by the organism, and no adverse health effects occur.
For carcinogens, however, it is assumed that no threshold exists and that even small number of molecules of carcinogen could potentially cause alterations in DNA, resulting in cancer Upton The same curve could also be used for a dose—effect relationship, in which the severity of the effect in an individual increases with dose Cassarett and Doull , OSHA In deriving criteria for a particular chemical, an average consumption of food and water is assumed, and a criterion is derived so that under normal conditions it does not result in a dose that would have adverse effects.
For example, an average human weighs 70 kg, drinks 2 l of water, inhales 20 m3 air per day, etc. EPA b. Based on an exposure assessment in a particular situation, one can derive total dose to an individual and compare it with existing criteria.
Therefore, for chemicals with existing criteria, one only has to perform exposure assessments to establish possible adverse effects of a chemical by comparing it with the criterion. Without exposure to a particular pollutant, there is no risk.
Thus, the most important task is to establish or estimate true potential exposures and then estimate risk either for a maximally exposed individual, an average exposure, or use the Monte Carlo method to find distribution functions for various parameters of exposures.
Frequently, such distributions are based on food surveys, census data, physiological data, etc. EPA b, b are useful for deriving real-life exposures. If a company has reliable monitoring data on their pollutants, it should be relatively simple to estimate exposures to potentially exposed individuals. For each particular chemical or situation, different sets of parameters may apply.
For better exposure assessment, it is also useful to know environmental pharmacokinetics. Substances that easily degrade and do not bioaccumulate are probably of less consequence than persistent compounds such as DDT, dioxins, and heavy metals. EPA has a long tradition of dealing with environmental pollutants and has developed criteria and standards for drinking water, ambient water, air, total intake reference dose RfD , reportable quantities RQs , and levels of concern LOC for many environmental pollutants from various lists of toxic chemicals.
Based on risk analysis for those chemicals, several types of criteria and standards for various media were derived using U. EPA-developed guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment, mutagenicity risk assessment, health risk assessment of chemical mixtures, suspect developmental toxicants, estimating exposures, and systemic toxicants risk assessment U. EPA was developed in order to derive criteria and standards for chemicals that were polluting waters in the United States U.
EPA Gradually, risk analysis methods were expanded to all environmental media U.
Most of the criteria values are derived from extrapolation from animal studies using assumptions about inhalation, water consumption, food consumption, and weight of the average human.
The details for criteria derivations and corresponding assumptions are available from the U. EPA U. EPA a,b. In order to extrapolate animal data to humans, an appropriate uncertainty factor usually a multiple of 10 is applied in order to protect human populations and add an extra measure of caution. Criteria are derived using very simple arithmetic from experimental dose—response values and appropriate assumptions about weights and consumption patterns.
When multiple animal studies exist, expert judgment is used to determine the most appropriate study. Usually, the most conservative studies and assumptions are used in order to provide a safety margin for error.
Some of the criteria derived by the U. EPA are 1. In derivation of these criteria, toxicity in fish and other aquatic organisms, as well as bioaccumulation, was considered. Usually, these are derived from short-term drinking water studies in rats and mice and application of a proper uncertainty factor U.
RfD reference dose , previously known as daily acceptable intake ADI , is defined as the total daily dose of a chemical in milligrams per kilogram of body weight that would be unlikely to cause adverse health effects even after a lifetime exposure Barnes and Dourson Or an RfD for a chemical is the estimation with uncertainty spanning perhaps one order of magnitude of a daily or continuous exposure to the human population including sensitive subgroups which is likely to be without an appreciable health risk.
RfDs are established from all available toxicological data for several hundred chemicals, particularly those associated with Toxic Release Inventories TRI. The establishment of MF is often rather subjective. The LOC level of concern is defined as concentration of a toxic chemical in air that the general public could endure for up to 1 hour without suffering from irreversible health effects U.
They were derived from IDLH immediately dangerous to health and safety values by dividing them with a factor of 10 or from LD50 by dividing them by Since IDLH are derived using qualitative risk analysis based mostly on expert judgment for a healthy worker, there is a great uncertainly about their accuracy and protectiveness.
Thus, the U. EPA used an additional uncertainty factor of ten. RQs reportable quantities are derived for chemical spill reporting.
The value of RQ is 1, , , , and lb, and it depends on the acute toxicity, carcinogenicity, fate, and transport in the environment and reactivity U. The arithmetic is based on simple assumptions and toxicity of a chemical.
EPA c. The cancer potency slope is an indication of magnitude of a cancer threat; however, there is a great uncertainty about the accuracy of this number, because of various assumptions made in its derivation U.
EPA c, a. Chapter I. Although for many chemicals air criteria are established based on risk analysis, only six air standards exist CO, SO2, O3, NOx, lead, and particulates Cassarett and Doull Standards for chemicals in air, water, or soil are derived with the consideration of criteria and other factors such as cost, policy issues, perception, etc. Generally, cost-benefit analysis is performed and alternative risks are considered. For example, although chlorination may cause cancer in a small number of individuals, chlorination removes the known risk of infectious diseases.
An outbreak of cholera in Peru led to the death of more than people because the officials decided that they did not want to expose the population to chlorine, which may cause cancer Anderson However, in order to prevent a hypothetical risk of death of ,,, the officials have introduced the far greater risk of cholera, a disease potentially deadly, that resulted in an actual death rate of This example illustrates that it is necessary to use common sense and comparative risk analysis when making decisions affecting a large number of people, rather than just mechanically apply risk analysis technique for a single chemical regardless of other possible risks.
EPA derived risk analysis methods for a number of particular cases dealing with the adverse effects of chemicals on the environment. One of the most controversial and complicated analysis is the Risk Analysis for Superfund U. EPA b , which has been involved in numerous regulatory and societal gridlocks. EPA manual essentially serves as a cookbook of procedures to follow in performing a risk assessment and feasibility study in a particular hazardous waste site. A student in scientific controversy may like to study this case.
With the passage of SARA, Title III law or Community Right-to-Know Law , a method of hazard analysis was developed jointly by three agencies to assess the probability of accidental release of toxic chemicals in the environment of the U.
There was no formal risk assessment initially applied in the derivation of either TLVs and PELs or RELs, and the numbers were derived based on expert committees qualitative and semiquantitative risk analysis.
Hundreds of criteria documents, published or unpublished, are available from the U. The information centers in those agencies can direct the reader to the most updated version of a document that contains method descriptions. Cholera Epidemic Traced to Risk Miscalculation. Nature Application Programming I CIS 3 High School Algebra or Equivalent Fall Objectives of the Course Upon completion of this course the student will be able to do the following items using the presently adopted language for this course Fall Java : a b Analyze business case studies and discuss strengths and weaknesses of various potential solutions.
Recognize and use problem solving techniques and methods of abstract logical thinking to develop and implement structured solutions of given software design problems. Apply problem solving techniques and design solutions to business problems and implement these solutions by writing computer programs. Write well-structured business programs. Evaluate and debug programs. Work in collaborative groups.
Catalog Description This course provides students with an understanding of business problems that are typically solved by writing computer programs, problem solving techniques to enable students to design solutions and programming skills learned in a traditional CS1 course.
Emphasis is placed on efficient software development for business related problems. Students are required to write, test and run programs.
Prerequisite: High School Algebra or Equivalent. Three credits. Demonstrations will be presented. Students will be required to write and execute programs on the intermediate level of difficulty.
Program assignments and tests will be evaluated and punctually returned to students with specific individual comments. Text A vast array of texts from a variety of publishers is available to teach this course.
Some of these include: Carrano, Frank. Java: Programming Concepts in Context. Prentice Hall, Currie, Edward. Fundamentals of Programming Using Java, 1 st ed. Lewis, John. Liang, Y. Introduction to Java Programming, Comprehensive, 8 th ed. Schneider, G.
Michael and Gersting, Judith. Invitation to Computer Science: Java Version, 3rd ed. Assessment Activities The final grade will be determined as a percentage from the following evaluation methods with varying weights at the discretion of the instructor: a b c d e f Examinations Quizzes Assignments Programs Attendance Performance H.
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Students with disabilities: Reserve the right to decide when to self-identify to the faculty member.
Might be required to communicate with faculty for accommodations which specifically involve the faculty. Will present the OSD Accommodation Approval Notice to faculty when requesting accommodations that involve the faculty. Approved accommodations will be recorded on the OSD Accommodation Approval notice and provided to the student. Students are expected to adhere to OSD procedures for self-identifying, providing documentation and requesting accommodations in a timely manner.
Contact Information: I.