Advertisement

Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 212, Issue 1, pp 241–267 | Cite as

Importance measures in reliability and mathematical programming

  • Xiaoyan Zhu
  • Way Kuo
Article

Abstract

The importance measures have been a sensitivity analysis for a probabilistic system and are applied in diverse fields along with other design tools. This paper provides a comprehensive view on modeling the importance measures to solve the reliability problems such as component assignment problems, redundancy allocation, system upgrading, and fault diagnosis and maintenance. It also investigates importance measures in broad applications such as networks, mathematical programming, sensitivity and uncertainty analysis, and probabilistic risk analysis and probabilistic safety assessment. The importance-measure based methods are among the most practical decision tools.

Keywords

Importance measures Reliability design PRA Mathematical programming Network flow Sensitivity analysis Uncertainty analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by a National Science Foundation Project # CMMI-0825908.

References

  1. Achterberg, T., Kocha, T., & Martinb, A. (2005). Branching rules revisited. Operations Research Letters, 33, 42–54. Google Scholar
  2. Aven, T., & Ostebo, R. (1986). Two new component importance measures for a flow network system. Reliability Engineering, 14, 75–80. Google Scholar
  3. Banzhaf, J. F. (1965). Weighted voting doesn’t work: a mathematical analysis. Rutgers Law Review, 19, 317–343. Google Scholar
  4. Barlow, R. E., & Proschan, F. (1975a). Importance of system components and fault tree events. Statistical Processes and Their Applications, 3, 153–172. Google Scholar
  5. Barlow, R. E., & Proschan, F. (1975b). Statistical theory of reliability and life testing probability models. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Google Scholar
  6. Bazaraa, M. S., Jarvis, J. J., & Sherali, H. D. (1990). Linear programming and network flows (2nd edn.). Hoboken: Wiley. Google Scholar
  7. Bergman, B. (1985a). On reliability theory and its applications. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 12, 1–41. Google Scholar
  8. Bergman, B. (1985b). On some new reliability importance measures. In W. J. Quirk (Ed.), Proceedings of IFAC SAFECOMP’85 (pp. 61–64). Google Scholar
  9. Birnbaum, Z. W. (1969). On the importance of different components in a multicomponent system. In P. R. Krishnaiah (Ed.), Multivariate Analysis (Vol. 2, pp. 581–592). New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  10. Boland, P. J., & El-Neweihi, E. (1995). Measures of component importance in reliability theory. Computers & Operations Research, 22, 455–463. Google Scholar
  11. Boland, P. J., & Proschan, F. (1984). Optimal arrangement of systems. Naval Research Logistics, 31, 399–407. Google Scholar
  12. Boland, P. J., El-Neweihi, E., & Proschan, F. (1988). Active redundancy allocation in coherent systems. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences, 2, 343–353. Google Scholar
  13. Boland, P. J., Proschan, F., & Tong, Y. L. (1989). Optimal arrangement of components via pairwise rearrangements. Naval Research Logistics, 36, 807–815. Google Scholar
  14. Boland, P. J., El-Neweihi, E., & Proschan, F. (1991). Redundancy importance and allocation of spares in coherent systems. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 29, 55–65. Google Scholar
  15. Boland, P. J., El-Neweihi, E., & Proschan, F. (1992). Stochastic order for redundancy allocations in series and parallel systems. Advances in Applied Probability, 24, 161–171. Google Scholar
  16. Borgonovo, E. (2007a). Differential, criticality and Birnbaum importance measures: an application to basic event, groups and SSCs in event trees and binary decision diagrams. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 92, 1458–1467. Google Scholar
  17. Borgonovo, E. (2007b). A new uncertainty importance measure. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 92, 771–784. Google Scholar
  18. Borgonovo, E., & Smith, C. (2010). Total order reliability importance in space PSA. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 7617–7618. Google Scholar
  19. Borgonovo, E., Apostolakis, G. E., Tarantola, S., & Saltelli, A. (2003). Comparison of global sensitivity analysis techniques and importance measures in PSA. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 79, 175–185. Google Scholar
  20. Brown, M., & Proschan, F. (1983). Imperfect repair. Journal of Applied Probability, 20, 851–859. Google Scholar
  21. Bueno, V. C. (2000). Component importance in a random environment. Statistics & Probability Letters, 48, 173–179. Google Scholar
  22. Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., & Saltelli, A. (2007). An effective screening design for sensitivity analysis of large models. Environmental Modelling & Software, 22, 1509–1518. Google Scholar
  23. Chang, G. J., Cui, L., & Hwang, F. K. (1999). New comparisons in Birnbaum importance for the consecutive-k-out-of-n system. Probability in the Engineering and Informational Sciences, 13, 187–192. Google Scholar
  24. Chang, H. W., & Hwang, F. K. (1999). Existence of invariant series consecutive-k-out-of-n:G systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-48, 306–308. Google Scholar
  25. Cheok, M. C., Parry, G. W., & Sherry, R. R. (1998). Use of importance measures in risk-informed regulatory applications. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 60, 213–226. Google Scholar
  26. Chiu, C. C., Yeh, Y. S., & Chou, J. S. (2001). An effective algorithm for optimal k-terminal reliability of distributed systems. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 6, 101–118. Google Scholar
  27. Cho, J. G., & Yum, B. J. (1997). Development and evaluation of an uncertainty importance measure in fault tree analysis. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 57, 143–157. Google Scholar
  28. Chun, M. H., Han, S. J., & Tak, N. I. (2000). An uncertainty importance measure using a distance metric for the change in a cumulative distribution function. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 70, 313–321. Google Scholar
  29. Derman, C., Lieberman, G. J., & Ross, S. M. (1972). On optimal assembly of system. Naval Research Logistics, 19, 569–574. Google Scholar
  30. Derman, C., Lieberman, G. J., & Ross, S. M. (1974). Assembly of systems having maximum reliability. Naval Research Logistics, 21, 1–12. Google Scholar
  31. Derman, C., Lieberman, G. J., & Ross, S. M. (1982). On the consecutive-k-of-n:F system. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-31, 57–63. Google Scholar
  32. Do Van, P., Barros, A., & Berenguer, C. (2008a). Importance measure on finite time horizon and application to Markovian multistate production systems. Journal of Risk and Reliability, 222, 449–461. Proceedings of the IMechE, Part O. Google Scholar
  33. Do Van, P., Barros, A., & Berenguer, C. (2008b). Reliability importance analysis of Markovian systems at steady state using perturbation analysis. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 93, 1605–1615. Google Scholar
  34. Do Van, P., Barros, A., & Berenguer, C. (2010). From differential to difference importance measures for Markov reliability models. European Journal of Operational Research, 24, 513–521. Google Scholar
  35. Du, D. Z., & Hwang, F. K. (1985). Optimal consecutive-2 systems of lines and cycles. Networks, 15, 439–447. Google Scholar
  36. Du, D. Z., & Hwang, F. K. (1987). Optimal assignments for consecutive-2 graphs. SIAM Journal on Algebraic and Discrete Methods, 8, 510–518. Google Scholar
  37. El-Neweihi, E., Proschan, F., & Sethuraman, J. (1986). Optimal allocation of components in parallel-series and series-parallel systems. Journal of Applied Probability, 23, 770–777. Google Scholar
  38. El-Neweihi, E., Proschan, F., & Sethuraman, J. (1987). Optimal assembly of systems using Schur functions and majorization. Naval Research Logistics, 34, 705–712. Google Scholar
  39. Fiondella, L., & Gokhale, S. S. (2008). Importance measures for a modular software system. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on quality software (pp. 338–343). Google Scholar
  40. Freixas, J., & Pons, M. (2008). The influence of the node criticality relation on some measures of component importance. Operations Research Letters, 36, 557–560. Google Scholar
  41. Freixas, J., & Puente, M. A. (2002). Reliability importance measures of the components in a system based on semivalues and probabilistic values. Annals of Operations Research, 109, 331–342. Google Scholar
  42. Fussell, J. B. (1975). How to hand-calculate system reliability and safety characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-24, 169–174. Google Scholar
  43. Gandini, A. (1990). Importance & sensitivity analysis in assessing system reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 39, 61–70. Google Scholar
  44. Golub, G. H., & Zha, H. (1994). Perturbation analysis of the canonical correlations of matrix pairs. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 210, 3–28. Google Scholar
  45. Griffith, W. S. (1980). Multistate reliability models. Journal of Applied Probability, 17, 735–744. Google Scholar
  46. Gupta, S., & Kumar, U. (2010). Maintenance resource prioritization in a production system using cost-effective importance measure. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop and congress on emaintenance (pp. 196–204). Google Scholar
  47. Ha, C., & Kuo, W. (2005). Multi-path approach for reliability-redundancy allocation using a scaling method. Journal of Heuristics, 11, 201–217. Google Scholar
  48. Ho, Y. C. (1988). Perturbation analysis explained. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 33, 761–763. Google Scholar
  49. Ho, Y. C. (1992). Perturbation analysis: concepts and algorithms. In J. J. Swain, D. Goldsman, R. C. Crain, & J. R. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1992 winter simulation conference (pp. 231–240). Google Scholar
  50. Homma, T., & Saltelli, A. (1996). Importance measures in global sensitivity analysis of nonlinear models. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 52, 1–17. Google Scholar
  51. Hwang, F. K. (1989). Optimal assignment of components to a two-stage k-out-of-n system. Mathematics of Operations Research, 14, 376–382. Google Scholar
  52. Hwang, F. K., & Pai, C. K. (2000). Sequential construction of a circular consecutive-2 system. Information Processing Letters, 75, 231–235. Google Scholar
  53. Iman, R. L. (1987). A matrix-based approach to uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for fault trees. Risk Analysis, 7, 21–23. Google Scholar
  54. Jenelius, E. (2010). Redundancy importance: links as rerouting alternatives during road network disruptions. Procedia Engineering, 3, 129–137. Google Scholar
  55. Kontoleon, J. M. (1979). Optimal link allocation of fixed topology networks. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 28, 145–147. Google Scholar
  56. Koutras, M. V., Papadopoylos, G., & Papastavridis, S. G. (1994). Note: pairwise rearrangements in reliability structures. Naval Research Logistics, 41, 683–687. Google Scholar
  57. Kucherenko, S., Rodriguez-Fernandez, M., Pantelides, C., & Shah, N. (2009). Monte Carlo evaluation of derivative-based global sensitivity measures. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 94, 1135–1148. Google Scholar
  58. Kuo, W., & Wan, R. (2007). Recent advances in optimal reliability allocation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 37, 143–156. Google Scholar
  59. Kuo, W., & Zhu, X. (2012a). Importance measures in reliability, risk, and optimization: principles and applications. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  60. Kuo, W., & Zhu, X. (2012b, in press). Relations and generalizations of importance measures in reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 61. Google Scholar
  61. Kuo, W., & Zhu, X. (2012c, in press). Some recent advances on importance measures in reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 61. Google Scholar
  62. Kuo, W., & Zuo, M. J. (2003). Optimal reliability modeling: principles and applications. New York: Wiley. Google Scholar
  63. Kuo, W., Zhang, W., & Zuo, M. J. (1990). A consecutive k-out-of-n:G: the mirror image of a consecutive k-out-of-n:F system. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-39, 244–253. Google Scholar
  64. Kuo, W., Prasad, V. R., Tillman, F. A., & Hwang, C. L. (2006). Optimal reliability design: fundamentals and applications (2nd edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  65. Lambert, H. E. (1975a). Fault trees for decision making in system safety and availability. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Report. Google Scholar
  66. Lambert, H. E. (1975b). Measure of importance of events and cut sets in fault trees. In R. E. Barlow, J. B. Fussell, & N. D. Singpurwalla (Eds.), Reliability and fault tree analysis (pp. 77–100). Philadelphia: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. Google Scholar
  67. Levitin, G., & Lisnianski, A. (1999). Importance and sensitivity analysis of multi-state systems using the universal generating function method. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 65, 271–282. Google Scholar
  68. Levitin, G., Podofillini, L., & Zio, E. (2003). Generalised importance measures for multi-state elements based on performance level restrictions. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 82, 287–298. Google Scholar
  69. Lin, F. H., & Kuo, W. (2002). Reliability importance and invariant optimal allocation. Journal of Heuristics, 8, 155–171. Google Scholar
  70. Malon, D. M. (1985). Optimal consecutive k-out-of-n:F component sequencing. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-34, 46–49. Google Scholar
  71. Malon, D. M. (1990). When is greedy module assembly optimal? Naval Research Logistics, 37, 847–854. Google Scholar
  72. Marseguerra, M., & Zio, E. (2004). Monte Carlo estimation of the differential importance measure: application to the protection system of a nuclear reactor. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 86, 11–24. Google Scholar
  73. Marshall, A., & Olkin, I. (1979). Inequalities: theory of majorizarion and its applications. New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar
  74. Meng, F. C. (1993). On selecting components for redundancy in coherent systems. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 41, 121–126. Google Scholar
  75. Meng, F. C. (1996). More on optimal allocation of components in coherent systems. Journal of Applied Probability, 33, 548–556. Google Scholar
  76. Mi, J. (1999). Optimal active redundancy in k-out-of-n system. Journal of Applied Probability, 36, 927–933. Google Scholar
  77. Mi, J. (2003). A unified way of comparing the reliability of coherent systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 52, 38–43. Google Scholar
  78. Morris, M. D. (1991). Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments. Technometrics, 33, 161–174. Google Scholar
  79. Nakashima, K., & Yamato, K. (1982). Variance-importance of system components. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-31, 99–100. Google Scholar
  80. Natvig, B. (1979). A suggestion of a new measure of importance of system component. Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, 9, 319–330. Google Scholar
  81. Natvig, B. (1982). On the reduction in remaining system lifetime due to the failure of a specific component. Journal of Applied Probability, 19, 642–652. Google Scholar
  82. Natvig, B. (1985). New light on measures of importance of system components. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 12, 43–54. Google Scholar
  83. Norros, I. (1986a). A compensator representation of multivariate life length distributions, with applications. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 13, 99–112. Google Scholar
  84. Norros, I. (1986b). Notes on Natvig’s measure of importance of system components. Journal of Applied Probability, 23, 736–747. Google Scholar
  85. Page, L. B., & Perry, J. E. (1994). Reliability polynomials and link importance in networks. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 43, 51–58. Google Scholar
  86. Papastavridis, S., & Hadzichristos, I. (1988). Formulas for the reliability of a consecutive-k-out-of-n:F system. Journal of Applied Probability, 26, 772–779. Google Scholar
  87. Peng, H., Coit, D. W., & Feng, Q. (2012). Component reliability criticality or importance measures for systems with degrading components. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 61, 4–12. Google Scholar
  88. Ramirez-Marquez, J. E., & Coit, D. W. (2005). Composite importance measures for multi-state systems with multi-state components. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 54, 517–529. Google Scholar
  89. Ramirez-Marquez, J. E., & Coit, D. W. (2007). Multi-state component criticality analysis for reliability improvement in multi-state systems. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 92, 1608–1619. Google Scholar
  90. Rushdi, A. M. (1985). Uncertainty analysis of fault-tree outputs. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-34, 458–462. Google Scholar
  91. Sfakianakis, M. (1993). Optimal arrangement of components in a consecutive k-out-of-r-from-n:F system. Microelectronics and Reliability, 33, 1573–1578. Google Scholar
  92. Shapley, L. S., & Shubik, M. (1954). A method for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system. American Political Science Review, 48, 787–792. Google Scholar
  93. Shen, K., & Xie, M. (1989). The increase of reliability of k-out-of-n systems through improving a component. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 26, 189–195. Google Scholar
  94. Shen, Z. J. M., Coullard, C., & Daskin, M. S. (2003). A joint location-inventory model. Transportation Science, 37, 40–55. Google Scholar
  95. Sobol, I. (1993). Sensitivity estimates for nonlinear mathematical models. Mathematical Modeling and Computational Experiment, 1, 407–414. Google Scholar
  96. Sobol, I. M. (2001) Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 55, 271–280. Google Scholar
  97. Sobol, I. M., & Kucherenko, S. S. (2005). On global sensitivity analysis of quasi-Monte Carlo algorithms. Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, 11, 83–92. Google Scholar
  98. Sobol, I. M., & Kucherenko, S. S. (2009). Derivative based global sensitivity measures and their link with global sensitivity indices. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 79, 3009–3017. Google Scholar
  99. Sobol, I. M., & Kucherenko, S. S. (2010). A new derivative based importance criterion for groups of variables and its link with the global sensitivity indices. Computer Physics Communications, 181, 1212–1217. Google Scholar
  100. Sobol, I. M., & Levitan, Y. L. (1999). On the use of variance reducing multipliers in Monte Carlo computations of a global sensitivity index. Computer Physics Communications, 117, 52–61. Google Scholar
  101. Sobol, I. M., & Shukhman, B. V. (2007). On global sensitivity indices: Monte Carlo estimates affected by random errors. Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, 13, 89–97. Google Scholar
  102. Sobol, I. M., Tarantola, S., Gatelli, D., Kucherenko, S., & Mauntz, W. (2007). Estimating the approximation error when fixing unessential factors in global sensitivity analysis. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 92, 957–960. Google Scholar
  103. Song, S., Lu, Z., & Cui, L. (2012). A generalized Borgonovo’s importance measure for fuzzy input uncertainty. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 189, 53–62. Google Scholar
  104. Taylor, A., & Zwicker, W. (1999). Simple games: desirability relations, trading, and pseudoweightings. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
  105. Tillman, F. A., Hwang, C. L., & Kuo, W. (1977). Determining component reliability and redundancy for optimum system reliability. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-26, 162–165. Google Scholar
  106. Tong, Y. L. (1985). A rearrangement inequality for the longest run, with an application to network reliability. Journal of Applied Probability, 22, 386–393. Google Scholar
  107. Tong, Y. L. (1986). Some new results on the reliability of circular consecutive-k-out-of-n:F system. In A. P. Basu (Ed.), Reliability and quality control (pp. 395–400). New York: Elsevier (North-Holland). Google Scholar
  108. van der Borst, M., & Schoonakker, H. (2001). An overview of PSA importance measures. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 72, 241–245. Google Scholar
  109. Vasseur, D., & Llory, M. (1999). International survey on PSA figures of merit. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 66, 261–274. Google Scholar
  110. Vaurio, J. K. (2011). Importance measures in risk-informed decision making: ranking, optimisation and configuration control. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 96, 1426–1436. Google Scholar
  111. Vesely, W. E. (1970). A time dependent methodology for fault tree evaluation. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 13, 337–360. Google Scholar
  112. Vesely, W. E., & Davis, T. C. (1985). Two measures of risk importance and their applications. Nuclear Technology & Radiation Protection, 68, 226–234. Google Scholar
  113. Vinod, G., Kushwaha, H. S., Verma, A. K., & Srividy, A. (2003). Importance measures in ranking piping components for risk informed in-service inspection. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 80, 107–113. Google Scholar
  114. Xie, M. (1987). On some importance measures of system components. Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, 25, 273–280. Google Scholar
  115. Xie, M., & Bergman, B. (1991). On a general measure of component importance. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 29, 211–220. Google Scholar
  116. Xie, M., & Shen, K. (1990). On the increase of system reliability due to some improvement at component level. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 28, 111–120. Google Scholar
  117. Yao, Q., Zhu, X., & Kuo, W. (2011). Heuristics for component assignment problems based on the Birnbaum importance. IIE Transactions, 43, 1–14. Google Scholar
  118. Yao, Q., Zhu, X., & Kuo, W. (2012). Importance-measure based genetic local search for component assignment problems. Annals of Operations Research (in review). Google Scholar
  119. Zhang, C., Ramirez-Marquez, J. E., & Sanseverino, C. M. R. (2011). A holistic method for reliability performance assessment and critical components detection in complex networks. IIE Transactions, 43, 661–675. Google Scholar
  120. Zhu, X., & Kuo, W. (2008). Comments on “A hierarchy of importance indices”. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 57, 529–531. Google Scholar
  121. Zhu, X., Yao, Q., & Kuo, W. (2012). Patterns of Birnbaum importance in linear consecutive-k-out-of-n systems. IIE Transactions, 44, 277–290. Google Scholar
  122. Zio, E., & Podofillini, L. (2003). Importance measures of multi-state components in multi-state systems. International Journal of Reliability, Quality, and Safety Engineering, 10, 289–310. Google Scholar
  123. Zio, E., & Podofillini, L. (2006). Accounting for components interactions in the differential importance measure. Reliability Engineering & Systems Safety, 91, 1163–1174. Google Scholar
  124. Zuo, M. J. (1993). Reliability and design of 2-dimensional consecutive-k-out-of-n systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, R-42, 488–490. Google Scholar
  125. Zuo, M. J., & Kuo, W. (1990). Design and performance analysis of consecutive k-out-of-n structure. Naval Research Logistics, 37, 203–230. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Information EngineeringUniversity of TennesseeKnoxvilleUSA
  2. 2.City University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations