International Journal of Fuzzy Systems

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 454–467 | Cite as

Global Sensitivity Analysis of the Failure Probability Upper Bound to Random and Fuzzy Inputs

  • Yan Shi
  • Zhenzhou LuEmail author
  • Lufeng Zhao


For structure with both random and fuzzy input variables, a global sensitivity analysis (GSA) model is established to quantitatively evaluate the effects of these two kinds of input uncertainties on the upper bound of the fuzzy failure probability. The relationship between failure possibility and fuzzy failure probability upper bound is firstly derived in this paper. Based on this relationship, the single-loop nested sampling method can be applied to estimate the GSA index of the random inputs to the upper bound of the fuzzy failure probability. A solution framework is also established to estimate the GSA indices of the fuzzy inputs based on the relationship between the upper bound of the fuzzy failure probability and the failure possibility. Several examples are introduced to show that the established global sensitivity analysis model can reflect the effects of these two kinds of inputs on the safety of the structural system. Furthermore, the proposed method can improve computational efficiency which is significant in the engineering application.


Global sensitivity analysis Failure probability upper bound Failure possibility Mixed input variables 



This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants 51475370 and 51775439).


  1. 1.
    Castillo, E., Mínguez, R., Castillo, C.: Sensitivity analysis in optimization and reliability problems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 93(12), 1788–1800 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li, L.Y., Lu, Z.Z., Cheng, L., et al.: Importance analysis on the failure probability of the fuzzy and random system and its state dependent parameter solution. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 250(2), 69–89 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sobol′, I.M.: Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math. Comput. Simul. 55(1–3), 271–280 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, W., Jin, R.: Analytical variance-based global sensitivity analysis in simulation-based design under uncertainty. J. Mech. Des. 127(5), 953–962 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, X., Pandey, M.D.: An effective approximation for variance-based global sensitivity analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 121(4), 164–174 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Borgonovo, E.: A new uncertainty importance measure. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 92(6), 771–784 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, Y.S., Liu, Y.S., Zhao, B., et al.: Moment-independent importance measure of dynamic reliability for double random vibration systems and its state dependent parameter solution. J. Vib. Shock 33(16), 109–114 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhai, Q., Yang, J.: Generalized moment-independent importance measures based on Minkowski distance. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 239(2), 449–455 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Yang, X.: Parameter sensitivity analysis for importance measure on failure probability and its efficient kriging solution. Math. Probl. Eng. 19(5), 1–13 (2015)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cui, L.J., Lu, Z.Z.: Moment-independent importance measure of basic random variable and its probability density evolution. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 53(4), 1138–1145 (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kang, C.: Reliability sensitivity analysis based on adaptive importance sampling method. J. Mech. Strength. 29(6), 946–951 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tootkaboni, M., Graham-Brady, L.: A multi-scale spectral stochastic method for homogenization of multi-phase periodic composites with random material properties. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 83(1), 59–90 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moore, R.E.: Interval analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1966)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tooranloo, H.S., Ayatollah, A.S.: Pathology the internet ranking service quality using failure mode and effect analysis in interbal-valued intuitionistic fuzzy environment. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 19(1), 1–15 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ben-Haim, Y., Elishakoff, I.: Convex Models of Uncertainty in Applied Mechanics. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam (1990)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elishakoff, I.: Essay on uncertainties in elastic and viscoelastic structures: from A.M. Freudenthal criticisms to modern convex modeling. Comput. Struct. 56(6), 871–895 (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1(1), 3–28 (1978)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tao, Z.F., Liu, X., Chen, H.Y., et al.: Ranking interval-valued fuzzy numbers with intuitionistic fuzzy possibility degree and its application to fuzzy multi-attribute decision making. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 19(3), 646–658 (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhao, M., Gao, Q., Fang, J., et al.: An approach to consensus measure based on possibility degrees of PLTSs in group decision making. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 1–16 (2018)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cremona, C., Gao, Y.: The possibilistic reliability theory: theoretical aspects and applications. Struct. Saf. 19(2), 173–201 (1997)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guo, S.X., Lu, Z.Z., Feng, L.F.: A fuzzy reliability approach for structures in the possibility context. Chin. J. Comput. Mech. 19(1), 89–93 (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mahmoudi, A., Sadi-Nezhad, S., Makui, A.: A hybrid fuzzy-intelligent system for group multi-attribute decision making. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 18(6), 1–14 (2016)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Deng, X., Zhao, J., Li, Z.: Sensitivity analysis of the fuzzy mean-entropy portfolio model with transaction costs based on credibility theory. Int. J. Fuzzy Syst. 20(1), 209–218 (2018)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kheirfam, B., Hasani, F.: Sensitivity analysis for fuzzy linear programming problems with fuzzy variables. Adv. Model. Optim. 12(2), 257–272 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baudrit, C., Guyonnet, D., Dubois, D.: Joint propagation and exploitation of probabilistic and possibilistic information in risk assessment. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 14(5), 593–608 (2006)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Guyoneet, D., Bourgine, B., Dubois, D., et al.: Hybrid approach for addressing uncertainty in risk assessments. J. Environ. Eng. 129(1), 68–78 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cooper, J.A., Ferson, S., Ginzburg, L.: Hybrid processing of stochastic and subjective uncertainty data. Risk Anal. 16(6), 785–791 (1996)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chang, Y.H.O.: Hybrid fuzzy least-squares regression analysis and its reliability measures. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 119(2), 225–246 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Eldred, M.S., Swiler, L.P.: Efficient algorithms for mixed aleatory-epistemic uncertainty quantification with application to radiation-hardened electronics. (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, Y.: Efficient uncertainty quantification in aerospace analysis and design. Dissertations and Theses–Gradworks (2013)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lockwood, B.A., Anitescu, M., Mavriplis, D.J.: Mixed aleatory/epistemic uncertainty quantification for hypersonic flows via gradient-based optimization and surrogate models. AIAA Paper (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xia, B.Z., Yu, D.: An interval random perturbation method for structural-acoustic system with hybrid uncertain parameters. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 97(3), 181–206 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang, C., Qiu, Z.P., He, Y.: Fuzzy interval perturbation method for uncertain heat conduction problem with interval and fuzzy parameters. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 104(5), 330–346 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Song, S.F., Lu, Z.Z., Li, W.: The uncertainty importance measures of the structural system in view of mixed uncertain variables. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 243, 25–35 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li, L.Y., Lu, Z.Z., Li, W.: Importance measure system of fuzzy and random input variables and its solution by point estimates. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 54(8), 2167–2179 (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Guo, J., Du, X.: Reliability sensitivity analysis with random and interval variables. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng. 78(13), 1585–1617 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Carlsson, C., Fuller, R.: On possibilistic mean value and variance of fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 122(2), 315–326 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang, C., Martthies, H.G., Qiu, Z.P.: Optimization-based inverse analysis for membership function identification in fuzzy steady-state heat transfer problem. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 3, 1–11 (2017)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Adduri, P.R., Penmetsa, R.C.: Confidence bounds on component reliability in the presence of mixed uncertain variables. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 50(3), 481–489 (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Taiwan Fuzzy Systems Association and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of AeronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations