2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2021.108295
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An evidential network-based hierarchical method for system reliability analysis with common cause failures and mixed uncertainties

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…And the classic AK‐IS method for small failure probability problem is used as a comparison to demonstrate the high efficiency of the proposed MRGP‐IS method. And the MCS method is adopted as a benchmark to verify the accuracy and thus its error for estimated failure probability is provided as 35 Errorgoodbreak=PfMCSPfPfitalicMCSgoodbreak×100%,$$ \mathrm{Error}=\frac{\mid {P}_f^{MCS}-{P}_f\mid }{P_f^{MCS}}\times 100\%, $$ where Pf$$ {P}_f $$ is the estimated failure probability from the non‐MCS method and PfMCS$$ {P}_f^{MCS} $$ is that from MCS.…”
Section: Several Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…And the classic AK‐IS method for small failure probability problem is used as a comparison to demonstrate the high efficiency of the proposed MRGP‐IS method. And the MCS method is adopted as a benchmark to verify the accuracy and thus its error for estimated failure probability is provided as 35 Errorgoodbreak=PfMCSPfPfitalicMCSgoodbreak×100%,$$ \mathrm{Error}=\frac{\mid {P}_f^{MCS}-{P}_f\mid }{P_f^{MCS}}\times 100\%, $$ where Pf$$ {P}_f $$ is the estimated failure probability from the non‐MCS method and PfMCS$$ {P}_f^{MCS} $$ is that from MCS.…”
Section: Several Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And the MCS method is adopted as a benchmark to verify the accuracy and thus its error for estimated failure probability is provided as. 35 Error =…”
Section: Several Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increasing complexity of engineered systems brings various challenges to system reliability modelling and assessment. The first challenge is the complicated failure dependency among components, such as common cause failure modes, propagated failure modes, isolation failure modes, and cascading failure modes [4]. The second challenge is the rise of epistemic uncertainty associated with both the system reliability models and degradation model parameters [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The interval set theory [13] is a well-known method to quantify the epistemic uncertainty via using the lower and upper bounds of the model parameters. However, the interval set theory can only quantify the epistemic uncertainty while aleatory and epistemic uncertainties always coexist and couple together in engineering practices [4]. For example, in manufacturing systems, the length and thickness of the critical structures are stochastic because of manufacturing deviations and measurement errors while the estimation of the stochastic model parameters is imprecise due to limited data and data uncertainty [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation