A conceptual framework for resilience: fundamental definitions, strategies and metrics

Abstract

The resilience system property has become more and more relevant, mainly because of the increasing dependance on a rapidly growing number of software-intensive, complex, socio-technical systems, which are facing uncertainty about changes they are expected to experience during their life-cycle and ways to deal with them. Methodologies for the systematic design and validation of resilience for such systems are thus highly necessary, and require contributions from several different fields. This paper contributes to current resilience research by providing a conceptual framework intended to serve as a common ground for the development of such methodologies. Its main points are: the identification of the main categories of changes a system should face; a clear definition of the different facets of resilience one could want to achieve, expressed in terms of the system dynamics; a mapping of each of these facets to design strategies that are better suited to achieve it; and the corresponding identification of possible metrics that can be used to assess its achievement.

Towards Trustworthy Autonomous Systems: Taxonomies and Future Perspectives

“…Moreover, all those measures should be put in relation with a service level acceptance criteria. Namely, a set of constraints and relationships enabling identification of the subset of system state space consisting of all those states where the service delivered can be considered correct and acceptable by the users [67]. Acceptability can be regulated by agencies and reference standards [68], or by market/customer demand through Service Level Agreements (SLA), but when operations are supported by multiple components interacting each other in a multi-stakeholder scenario, the definition of service level acceptance becomes blurred and subjective; that prevents the adoption of the autonomous evidence-driven decision making mechanisms required for TAS.…”

Using HOQ Methodology to Prioritise Organisational Resilience Decisions in Training Establishments

“…(2020) described several resilience metric alternatives selected from the academic literature underpinned by the system engineering context that includes various measures of system failure and recovery. Andersson (2021) proposed to measure failure prevention; cumulative degradation amount and severity; and recoverability in support of system resilience strategies. Another approach to resilience measurement is based on using survey instruments.…”