Skip to content

Probabilistic Risk Scoring: Combining Independent Quality Signals

Industry: Supply Chain / Vendor Management | Role: Chief Risk Officer, Procurement Lead | Time to value: 1-2 hours

The Problem

You evaluate vendors against multiple independent quality signals — financial stability, SOC 2 compliance, delivery performance, cybersecurity posture, ESG rating. Each signal has its own confidence level. You need two answers: what is the probability that at least one signal indicates a problem, and what is the probability that a vendor passes every check? Weighted averages give you neither.

The Traditional Approach

Teams typically assign weights to each signal and compute a weighted average. This is mathematically wrong for the questions being asked — a vendor with five 80%-confidence signals is not "80% risky." Custom scoring models get built in Python or Excel, but they require manual calibration every time a new signal source is added. The difference between "any-failure" risk (noisy-OR) and "all-must-pass" reliability (joint probability) is either conflated or handled by maintaining two separate models that drift apart. When a vendor's score changes, explaining why requires digging through the model code.

With Uni

The notebook models each quality signal as an independent probabilistic fact with its own confidence. Noisy-OR aggregation computes the probability that at least one signal indicates risk — the "any-failure" score. Joint reliability computes the probability that all checks pass simultaneously. Both are expressed as declarative rules, not custom aggregation code. Adding a new signal source means adding one fact; the aggregation updates automatically. Every vendor score includes a full derivation showing exactly which signals contributed and how.

What You'll See

  • Vendor risk scores using noisy-OR that correctly model independent failure modes
  • Joint reliability scores showing the probability all quality checks pass simultaneously
  • Clear semantic separation between "any-failure" risk and "all-must-pass" reliability
  • Per-signal contribution breakdown explaining which signals drive the score
  • Automatic re-scoring when signal confidences are updated — no recalibration needed

Why It Matters

The difference between noisy-OR and weighted-average scoring is not academic — it changes which vendors get flagged. Correct probabilistic combination means fewer false negatives on genuinely risky vendors and fewer false positives on safe ones.


Run the notebook →