Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty (BEPU): Why It Is Still Not Widely Used

Evgeny Ivanov, Giovanni Bruna, Antonio Sargeni, Franck Dubois

Open source

DOI: 10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122
Published: 2019-07-15
Container: Nuclear Technology
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Open access: unknown

Credibility signals

uncertain Score 64/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

supportingDOI registered: A matching record was returned by Crossref. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
supportingDOI resolves: A matching record was returned by Crossref. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
supportingMetadata completeness: All 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122,
  title = {Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty (BEPU): Why It Is Still Not Widely Used},
  author = {Evgeny Ivanov and Giovanni Bruna and Antonio Sargeni and Franck Dubois},
  year = {2019},
  journal = {Nuclear Technology},
  doi = {10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty (BEPU): Why It Is Still Not Widely Used
AU  - Evgeny Ivanov
AU  - Giovanni Bruna
AU  - Antonio Sargeni
AU  - Franck Dubois
PY  - 2019
JO  - Nuclear Technology
DO  - 10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122
ER  -

APA

Ivanov, E., Bruna, G., Sargeni, A., & Dubois, F. (2019). Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty (BEPU): Why It Is Still Not Widely Used. Nuclear Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2019.1627122

Source records

crossref · retrieved 2026-09-26T10:17:41.684Z