Advertisement

Comparative Analysis of Service Life Prediction Methods

Chapter
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

In this chapter, a comparative analysis of the different proposed models is performed. First the predictive ability of each model is evaluated through the comparison between the values obtained by each model and the data collected in field work, corresponding to the real degradation condition of the façades analysed. In a second step of the analysis, the sensitivity and specificity of each model is evaluated based on ROC curves, to analyse the accuracy of each model to correctly classify the case studies that may have reached the end of their service life. Once the predictive accuracy and the classification capabilities of each model are evaluated, a multi-criteria analysis is performed. This multi-criteria analysis encompasses different criteria that should be taken into account by different stakeholders to choose the best model for a specific application. A sensitivity analysis is performed in order to analyse the best model for distinct decision-making profiles. Based on these analyses, some recommendations are made, referring the advantages and limitations of the models analysed and thus allowing a more rational and informed selection of a service life prediction model as far as the purpose of the model and the profile of the planner and the perspective of the user are concerned.

Keywords

Service Life Prediction Models Multiple Nonlinear Regression Model Fuzzy Logic Model Stone Claddings Richards Curve 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Altman DG, Bland JM (1994) Diagnostic tests 2: predictive values. Br Med J 309(6947):102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bana, Costa CA (1993) Les problématiques dans le cadre de l’activité d’aide à la décision. Document du LAMSADE no. 74, Université Paris DauphineGoogle Scholar
  3. Bardhan T, Ngeru J, Pitts R Jr (2011) A Delphi-multi-criteria decision making approach in the selection of an enterprise-wide integration strategy. In: Second international conference on information management and evaluation, Toronto, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  4. Basel JS, Brühl R (2013) Rationality and dual process models for reasoning in managerial cognition and decision making. Eur Manage J 31(6):745–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blumer A, Ehrenfeucht A, Haussler D, Warmuth MK (1987) Occam’s razor. Inf Process Lett 24:377–380MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Bordass W, Cohen R, Staneven M, Leaman A (2000) Assessing building performance in use 2: technical performance of the Probe buildings. Build Res Inf 29(2):103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brans J-P (1994) The PROMCALC & GAIA decision support system for multicriteria decision aid. Decis Support Syst 12:297–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carver SJ (2014) Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems. Int J Geogr Inf Syst 5(3):321–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cochran JK, Chen H-N (2005) Fuzzy multi-criteria selection of object-oriented simulation software for production system analysis. Computers & Operations Research 32:153–168MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Collinson P (1998) Of bombers, radiologists, and cardiologists: time to ROC. Heart 80(3):215–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damásio A (1994) Descartes’ error: emotion, reason, and the human brain, 1st edn. Grosset/Putnam, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  13. Dieterle F (2003) Multianalyte quantifications by means of integration of artificial neural networks, genetic algorithms and Chemometrics for time-resolved analytical data. Ph.D Thesis in Chemical and Pharmacy, Eberhard Karls Tübingen University, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  14. Einstein A (1921) Geometry and Experience. Prussian Academy of Science, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  15. Frangopol DM, Lin K-Y, Estes AC (1997) Reliability of reinforced concrete girders under corrosion attack. J Struct Eng 123(3):286–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gigerenzer G, Selten R (eds) (2002) Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  17. Goodwin P, Wright G (1991) Decision analysis for management judgement. Wiley, Chichester, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  18. Halpern S (1978) The assurance sciences: an introduction to quality control and reliability, 1st edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, USAGoogle Scholar
  19. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, USACrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Hovde PJ (2000) Factor methods for service life prediction: a state-of-the-art. Draft Report, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  21. Hovde PJ (2002) The factor method for service life prediction from theoretical evaluation to practical implementation. In: 9th International conference on durability of buildings materials and components, Brisbane, Australia, Paper 232.Google Scholar
  22. ISO 15686-1 (2011) Buildings and constructed assets—service life planning—part 1: general principles and framework. International Organization for Standardization, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  23. Jato-Espino D, Rodriguez-Hernandez J, Andrés-Valeri VC, Ballester-Muñoz F (2014) A fuzzy stochastic multi-criteria model for the selection of urban pervious pavements. Expert Syst Appl 41(15):6807–6817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jiang Y, Sinha KC (1989) Bridge service life prediction model using the Markov chain. Transportation Research Record No. 1223, Transportation Research Board. National Research Council, Washington D.C., USA, pp 24–30Google Scholar
  25. Lacasse MA, Sjöström C (2004) Recent advances in methods for service life prediction of buildings materials and components—an overview. In: CIB World Building Congress, Canada, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  26. Lewis CD (1997) Demand forecasting and inventory control. A computer aided learning approach. 1st Edn, Woodhead Publishing Ltd., In association with the Institute of Operations Management, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  27. Limbourg P, Aponte DES (2005) An optimization algorithm for imprecise multi-objective problem functions. IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC 2005), Edinburgh, pp 459–466Google Scholar
  28. Lounis Z, Mirza MS (2001) Reliability-based service life prediction of deteriorating concrete structures. In: 3rd international conference on concrete under severe conditions, vol 1. Vancouver, Canada, pp 965–972Google Scholar
  29. Lourenço PB (2002) Computations of historical masonry constructions. Prog Struct Mat Eng 4(3):301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lourenço PB, Krakowiak KJ, Fernandes FM, Ramos LF (2007) Failure analysis of Monastery of Jerónimos, Lisbon: how to learn from sophisticated numerical models. Eng Fail Anal 14(2):280–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Madanat S, Mishalani R, Ibrahim WHW (1995) Estimation of infrastructure transition probabilities from condition rating data. J Infrastruct Syst 1(2):120–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Manel S, Williams HC, Ormerod SJ (2001) Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence. J Appl Ecol 38:921–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marteinsson B (2003) Assessment of service lives in the design of buildings—development of the factor method. Licentiate Thesis, KTH’s Research School, University of Gävle, GävleGoogle Scholar
  34. Maroco J (2007) Statistical analysis using SPSS. (in Portuguese), 3rd edn. Sílabo Editions, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  35. Miwa K, Simon HA (1993) Production system modeling to represent individual differences: tradeoff between simplicity and accuracy in simulation behavior. Prospects for artificial intelligence. Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications. In: Sloman A, Hogg D, Humphreys G, Ramsay A, Partridge D (eds) Proceedings of AISB93, the ninth biennial conference of the society of the study of artificial intelligence and the simulation of behaviour, IOS Press, 1993, pp 158–167Google Scholar
  36. Morcous G, Lounis Z, Mirza MS (2002) Service-life prediction of concrete bridge decks using case-based reasoning. In: 6th international conference on short and medium span bridges. Vancouver, Canada, pp 769–776Google Scholar
  37. Moser K (2004) Engineering design methods for service life prediction. In: CIB W080/RILEM 175 SLM: service life methodologies prediction of service life for buildings and components, task group: performance based methods of service life prediction. Trondheim, Norway, pp 52–95Google Scholar
  38. Moser K, Edvardsen C (2002) Engineering design method for service life prediction. In: 9th international conference on the durability of building materials and components 2002. Brisbane, Australia, paper 222Google Scholar
  39. Oberkampf WL, Helton JC, Joslyn CA, Wojtkiewicz SF, Ferson S (2004) Challenge problems: uncertainty in system response given uncertain parameters. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 85(1–3):11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Obuchowski NA (2003) Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 229:3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Phillips LD (1986) Decision analysis and its application in industry, 1st edn. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  42. Ratkowsky DA (1983) Nonlinear regression modeling: a unified practical approach, 1st edn. Marcel Dekker Editors, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Reiser B, Faraggi D (1997) Confidence intervals for the generalized ROC criterion. Biometrics 53(2):644–652CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Robertson EA, Zweig MH, Van Steirteghem MD (1983) Evaluating the clinical accuracy of laboratory tests. Am J Clin Pathol 79:78–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ross SM (1996) Stochastic processes, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  46. Roy B (1985) Méthodologie multicritère d’aide à la décision, 1st edn. Economica, ParisGoogle Scholar
  47. Rudbeck C (1999) Assessing the service life of building envelope construction. In: 8th international conference on durability of building materials and components. Vancouver, Canada, pp 1051–1061Google Scholar
  48. Sanders DH, Zhang YJ (1994) Bridge deterioration models for states with small bridge inventories. Transportation Research Record No. 1442, Transportation Research Board. National Research Council, Washington D.C., USA, pp 101–109Google Scholar
  49. Setunge S, Hasan MS (2011) Concrete bridge deterioration prediction using Markov chain approach. In: International conference on structural engineering, construction and management (ICSECM), Kandy, Sri Lanka, Paper 95Google Scholar
  50. Shohet IM, Paciuk M (2004) Service life prediction of exterior cladding components under standard conditions. Constr Manage Econ 22(10):1081–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shohet I, Rosenfeld Y, Puterman M, Gilboa E (1999) Deterioration patterns for maintenance management—a methodological approach. 8th international conference on durability of building materials and components. Vancouver, Canada, pp 1666–1678Google Scholar
  52. Silva A, de Brito J, Gaspar PL (2012) Application of the factor Method to maintenance decision support for stone cladding. Autom Constr 22(3):165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Silva A, Dias JLR, Gaspar PL, de Brito J (2013) Statistical models applied to service life prediction of rendered façades. Autom Constr 30:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vergouwe Y (2003) Validation of clinical prediction models. Theory and applications in testicular germ cell cancer. Ph.D Thesis in Biomedicine, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  55. Vincke P (1992) Multicriteria decision-aid, 1st edn. Wiley, New York, USAzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning. Pion, LondonGoogle Scholar
  57. Yoon K, Hwang C-L (1995) Multiple attribute decision making an introduction, 1st edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, USAGoogle Scholar
  58. Zeleny M (1998) Multiple criteria decision making: eight concepts of optimality. Human Syst Manage 17:97–107Google Scholar
  59. Zimmermann H-J (2000) An application-oriented view of modeling uncertainty. Eur J Oper Res 122(2):190–198CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Instituto Superior TécnicoUniversidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Faculty of ArchitectureUniversidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations