Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth

► Under epistemic uncertainty a risk metric expected value differs from its nominal value. ► Separability and state-of-knowledge independence are necessary for coincidence. ► We extend Risk Achievement Worth to make it robust to epistemic uncertainty. Risk achievement worth is one of the most widely...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of operational research 2012-10, Vol.222 (2), p.301-311
Hauptverfasser: Borgonovo, E., Smith, C.L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 311
container_issue 2
container_start_page 301
container_title European journal of operational research
container_volume 222
creator Borgonovo, E.
Smith, C.L.
description ► Under epistemic uncertainty a risk metric expected value differs from its nominal value. ► Separability and state-of-knowledge independence are necessary for coincidence. ► We extend Risk Achievement Worth to make it robust to epistemic uncertainty. Risk achievement worth is one of the most widely utilized importance measures. RAW is defined as the ratio of the risk metric value attained when a component has failed over the base case value of the risk metric. Traditionally, both the numerator and denominator are point estimates. Relevant literature has shown that inclusion of epistemic uncertainty (i) induces notable variability in the point estimate ranking and (ii) causes the expected value of the risk metric to differ from its nominal value. We investigate the conditions under which the equality of the nominal and expected values of a reliability risk metric holds. We then study how the presence of epistemic uncertainty affects RAW and the associated ranking. We propose an extension of RAW (called ERAW) which allows one to obtain a ranking robust to epistemic uncertainty. We discuss the properties of ERAW and the conditions under which it coincides with RAW. We apply our findings to a probabilistic risk assessment model developed for the safety analysis of NASA lunar space missions.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.008
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1060424</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0377221712003554</els_id><sourcerecordid>2691022011</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-ac69382fc731702adf7739ca0f87b984ff132648f56bd1c9828b2a467be7d9e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90Utv1DAQB3ALgcRS-AKcIhASB5L6ET8icUErXlWlXnq3vM5Y65DYi-202m-Po604cODky2_GM_NH6C3BHcFEXE8dTDF1FBPaYd5hrJ6hHVGStkIJ_BztMJOypZTIl-hVzhPGmHDCd-hmH5dTzL5As6xz8bMPYJIv508NnHwusHjbrMFCKsaHcm5MGJvk86_G2KOHB1gglOYxpnJ8jV44M2d48_ReoftvX-_3P9rbu-8_919uW9v3Q2mNFQNT1FnJiMTUjE5KNliDnZKHQfXOEUZFrxwXh5HYQVF1oKYX8gByHIBdoXeXtjEXr7Oto9ujjSGALZpggXvaV_Txgk4p_l4hF734bGGeTYC45urqCJwOnFb6_h86xTWFukFVtF6XM86qohdlU8w5gdOn5BeTzhXpLQI96S0CvUWgMdc1glr04am1ydbMLplgff5bSQVmmHFZ3eeLg3q2Bw9pWwvq0Ueftq3G6P_3zR-Vf5u6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1021015353</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Borgonovo, E. ; Smith, C.L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Borgonovo, E. ; Smith, C.L. ; Idaho National Laboratory (INL)</creatorcontrib><description>► Under epistemic uncertainty a risk metric expected value differs from its nominal value. ► Separability and state-of-knowledge independence are necessary for coincidence. ► We extend Risk Achievement Worth to make it robust to epistemic uncertainty. Risk achievement worth is one of the most widely utilized importance measures. RAW is defined as the ratio of the risk metric value attained when a component has failed over the base case value of the risk metric. Traditionally, both the numerator and denominator are point estimates. Relevant literature has shown that inclusion of epistemic uncertainty (i) induces notable variability in the point estimate ranking and (ii) causes the expected value of the risk metric to differ from its nominal value. We investigate the conditions under which the equality of the nominal and expected values of a reliability risk metric holds. We then study how the presence of epistemic uncertainty affects RAW and the associated ranking. We propose an extension of RAW (called ERAW) which allows one to obtain a ranking robust to epistemic uncertainty. We discuss the properties of ERAW and the conditions under which it coincides with RAW. We apply our findings to a probabilistic risk assessment model developed for the safety analysis of NASA lunar space missions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0377-2217</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-6860</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.008</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EJORDT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Decision analysis ; Decision theory. Utility theory ; epistemic ; Epistemology ; Estimates ; Exact sciences and technology ; Expected values ; importance ; Importance measures ; MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING ; NASA ; Operational research ; Operational research and scientific management ; Operational research. Management science ; Probabilistic risk assessment ; Ranking ; RAW ; Reliability analysis ; Reliability theory. Replacement problems ; Risk ; Risk analysis ; Risk assessment ; Risk theory. Actuarial science ; Space exploration ; Studies ; Uncertainty ; Uncertainty analysis</subject><ispartof>European journal of operational research, 2012-10, Vol.222 (2), p.301-311</ispartof><rights>2012 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Sequoia S.A. Oct 16, 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-ac69382fc731702adf7739ca0f87b984ff132648f56bd1c9828b2a467be7d9e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-ac69382fc731702adf7739ca0f87b984ff132648f56bd1c9828b2a467be7d9e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.008$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,782,786,887,3554,27933,27934,46004</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=26030357$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/1060424$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Borgonovo, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, C.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Idaho National Laboratory (INL)</creatorcontrib><title>Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth</title><title>European journal of operational research</title><description>► Under epistemic uncertainty a risk metric expected value differs from its nominal value. ► Separability and state-of-knowledge independence are necessary for coincidence. ► We extend Risk Achievement Worth to make it robust to epistemic uncertainty. Risk achievement worth is one of the most widely utilized importance measures. RAW is defined as the ratio of the risk metric value attained when a component has failed over the base case value of the risk metric. Traditionally, both the numerator and denominator are point estimates. Relevant literature has shown that inclusion of epistemic uncertainty (i) induces notable variability in the point estimate ranking and (ii) causes the expected value of the risk metric to differ from its nominal value. We investigate the conditions under which the equality of the nominal and expected values of a reliability risk metric holds. We then study how the presence of epistemic uncertainty affects RAW and the associated ranking. We propose an extension of RAW (called ERAW) which allows one to obtain a ranking robust to epistemic uncertainty. We discuss the properties of ERAW and the conditions under which it coincides with RAW. We apply our findings to a probabilistic risk assessment model developed for the safety analysis of NASA lunar space missions.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Decision analysis</subject><subject>Decision theory. Utility theory</subject><subject>epistemic</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Expected values</subject><subject>importance</subject><subject>Importance measures</subject><subject>MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING</subject><subject>NASA</subject><subject>Operational research</subject><subject>Operational research and scientific management</subject><subject>Operational research. Management science</subject><subject>Probabilistic risk assessment</subject><subject>Ranking</subject><subject>RAW</subject><subject>Reliability analysis</subject><subject>Reliability theory. Replacement problems</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Risk analysis</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Risk theory. Actuarial science</subject><subject>Space exploration</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>Uncertainty analysis</subject><issn>0377-2217</issn><issn>1872-6860</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp90Utv1DAQB3ALgcRS-AKcIhASB5L6ET8icUErXlWlXnq3vM5Y65DYi-202m-Po604cODky2_GM_NH6C3BHcFEXE8dTDF1FBPaYd5hrJ6hHVGStkIJ_BztMJOypZTIl-hVzhPGmHDCd-hmH5dTzL5As6xz8bMPYJIv508NnHwusHjbrMFCKsaHcm5MGJvk86_G2KOHB1gglOYxpnJ8jV44M2d48_ReoftvX-_3P9rbu-8_919uW9v3Q2mNFQNT1FnJiMTUjE5KNliDnZKHQfXOEUZFrxwXh5HYQVF1oKYX8gByHIBdoXeXtjEXr7Oto9ujjSGALZpggXvaV_Txgk4p_l4hF734bGGeTYC45urqCJwOnFb6_h86xTWFukFVtF6XM86qohdlU8w5gdOn5BeTzhXpLQI96S0CvUWgMdc1glr04am1ydbMLplgff5bSQVmmHFZ3eeLg3q2Bw9pWwvq0Ueftq3G6P_3zR-Vf5u6</recordid><startdate>20121016</startdate><enddate>20121016</enddate><creator>Borgonovo, E.</creator><creator>Smith, C.L.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Sequoia S.A</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20121016</creationdate><title>Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth</title><author>Borgonovo, E. ; Smith, C.L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c449t-ac69382fc731702adf7739ca0f87b984ff132648f56bd1c9828b2a467be7d9e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Decision analysis</topic><topic>Decision theory. Utility theory</topic><topic>epistemic</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Expected values</topic><topic>importance</topic><topic>Importance measures</topic><topic>MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING</topic><topic>NASA</topic><topic>Operational research</topic><topic>Operational research and scientific management</topic><topic>Operational research. Management science</topic><topic>Probabilistic risk assessment</topic><topic>Ranking</topic><topic>RAW</topic><topic>Reliability analysis</topic><topic>Reliability theory. Replacement problems</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Risk analysis</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Risk theory. Actuarial science</topic><topic>Space exploration</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>Uncertainty analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Borgonovo, E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, C.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Idaho National Laboratory (INL)</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>European journal of operational research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Borgonovo, E.</au><au>Smith, C.L.</au><aucorp>Idaho National Laboratory (INL)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth</atitle><jtitle>European journal of operational research</jtitle><date>2012-10-16</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>222</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>301</spage><epage>311</epage><pages>301-311</pages><issn>0377-2217</issn><eissn>1872-6860</eissn><coden>EJORDT</coden><abstract>► Under epistemic uncertainty a risk metric expected value differs from its nominal value. ► Separability and state-of-knowledge independence are necessary for coincidence. ► We extend Risk Achievement Worth to make it robust to epistemic uncertainty. Risk achievement worth is one of the most widely utilized importance measures. RAW is defined as the ratio of the risk metric value attained when a component has failed over the base case value of the risk metric. Traditionally, both the numerator and denominator are point estimates. Relevant literature has shown that inclusion of epistemic uncertainty (i) induces notable variability in the point estimate ranking and (ii) causes the expected value of the risk metric to differ from its nominal value. We investigate the conditions under which the equality of the nominal and expected values of a reliability risk metric holds. We then study how the presence of epistemic uncertainty affects RAW and the associated ranking. We propose an extension of RAW (called ERAW) which allows one to obtain a ranking robust to epistemic uncertainty. We discuss the properties of ERAW and the conditions under which it coincides with RAW. We apply our findings to a probabilistic risk assessment model developed for the safety analysis of NASA lunar space missions.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.008</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0377-2217
ispartof European journal of operational research, 2012-10, Vol.222 (2), p.301-311
issn 0377-2217
1872-6860
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1060424
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Applied sciences
Decision analysis
Decision theory. Utility theory
epistemic
Epistemology
Estimates
Exact sciences and technology
Expected values
importance
Importance measures
MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING
NASA
Operational research
Operational research and scientific management
Operational research. Management science
Probabilistic risk assessment
Ranking
RAW
Reliability analysis
Reliability theory. Replacement problems
Risk
Risk analysis
Risk assessment
Risk theory. Actuarial science
Space exploration
Studies
Uncertainty
Uncertainty analysis
title Composite multilinearity, epistemic uncertainty and risk achievement worth
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-11-30T04%3A33%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Composite%20multilinearity,%20epistemic%20uncertainty%20and%20risk%20achievement%20worth&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20operational%20research&rft.au=Borgonovo,%20E.&rft.aucorp=Idaho%20National%20Laboratory%20(INL)&rft.date=2012-10-16&rft.volume=222&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=301&rft.epage=311&rft.pages=301-311&rft.issn=0377-2217&rft.eissn=1872-6860&rft.coden=EJORDT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.05.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E2691022011%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1021015353&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0377221712003554&rfr_iscdi=true