On page 16 of
http://www.eng.ox.ac.uk/samp/pubs/clifton_transfer.pdf
A subjective judgement is made by the author: this takes a little while to sink in...please persist
"Applications in which a false negative classification carries a higher cost than a false positive classification" ( THEY MEAN CANCER CELLS IN PEOPLE. This means the medical doctors will persue you in court if the get it wrong)
"Conversely, applications in which a false positive classification carries a higher cost than a false negative" (THEY MEAN AIRCRAFT ENGINES..this means that unless the relatives of 469 people bring a class action in court, life and limb is worth less than an engine repair...OR...the insurance will cover it.)
Here it is in their words:
"Systems for the identification of abnormal operating conditions in gas-turbine engines are of this type: the cost associated with a false positive
classication is high, often involving significant examination of equipment and maintenance processes."
The only way anyone sane would consider this is with the knowledge that the A388 had FOUR engines that would not fail all at once: and uncontained engines failures are rare statistically
Now I just wonder if, after realising the Qantas A388 had 469 lives at risk, they suddenly realised that the costs would be higher than they imagined.
Then again it did have FOUR engines.
No.. this is unacceptable. They set out a scheme that had a priority of financial risk reduction without realising they had 469 lives at risk as opposed to the ONE life they have in assessment of cancer patients.
This would be a very good "moral" assignment for our pals in management.
A good one for the lawyers too. The only way this will be solved will be in court.
This academic team should stay with medical statistics. They themselves are a risk to society if they use their "academic clout" to provide a lever for ill advised and naiive commercial managers.