ABSTRACT
Proper evaluation of the risk associated to a cyber attack is a crucial aspect for many companies. There is an increasing need to plan for and implement effective ways to address cyber security, data security, and privacy protection. Estimating the risk of a successful cyber attack is an important issue, since this type of threat is proliferating and thus poses increasing danger to companies and the customers who use their services. While quantitative loss data are rarely available, it is possible to obtain a qualitative evaluation on an ordinal scale of severity of cyber attacks from experts of the sector. Hence, it is natural to apply order response models for the analysis of cyber risk. In particular, we rely on cumulative link models. We explain the experts' assessment of the severity of a cyber attack as a function of a set of explanatory variables describing the characteristics of the attack under consideration. A measure of diffusion of the effects of the attacks obtained via the use of a network structure is also incorporated into the set of explanatory variables of the model. Along with the description of the methodology, we present a detailed analysis of a real data set that includes information on serious cyber attacks occurred worldwide in the period 2017-2018.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: sRaw (specific airway resistance) is a corrected index (Raw multiplied by thoracic gas volume) that describes airway behaviour regardless of lung volume. Normal values of sRaw in adult subjects have never been formally defined. To establish sRaw interpretation criteria and to define a range of reference values, we evaluated variability, reproducibility and reliability of sRaw measurements in a group of healthy adults. METHODS: We analysed 517 subjects of both genders, aged 18-65 (group A), and to assess the reproducibility of the measurements, we investigated intra-individual variation and potential daily and weekly sRaw rhythms in a subgroup of 18 co-operative healthy subjects (group B). RESULTS: In group A, there was no pattern of association between any of the considered anthropometric parameters; mean sRaw was higher in men (6.24 vs.5.95 cmH2O s in females; P = 0.0128), but when the data were stratified by age, gender-related differences were only found in the group aged 46-60 (males 6.45 cmH2O s, females 6.01 cmH2O s; P = 0.0219). In group B, there was no statistically significant, time-dependent variation during the single tests, nor any circadian or weekly rhythm. CONCLUSIONS: sRaw is a reliable parameter; therefore, we propose that the lower and upper 95% confidence limits should be considered as reference values for adults of both genders, regardless of age. The availability of reference values may be useful in clinical practice and research.
