IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v111y2013icp139-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can we trust module-respect heuristics?

Author

Listed:
  • Mo, Yuchang

Abstract

BDD (Binary Decision Diagrams) have proven to be a very efficient tool to assess Fault Trees. However, the size of BDD, and therefore the efficiency of the whole methodology, depends dramatically on the choice of variable ordering. The determination of the best variable ordering is intractable. Therefore, heuristics have been designed to select reasonably good variable orderings. One very important common feature for good static heuristics is to respect modules. In this paper, the notion of module-respect is studied in a systematic way. It is proved that under certain condition there always exists an optimal ordering that respects modules. This condition is that for each module there is always a smallest module BDD and each included module variable appears only once. On the other hand, it is shown that for the trees not satisfying the above sufficient condition the optimal orderings may not be able to be directly generated using module-respect heuristics, even when the shuffling strategy is used.

Suggested Citation

  • Mo, Yuchang, 2013. "Can we trust module-respect heuristics?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 139-146.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:111:y:2013:i:c:p:139-146
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2012.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832012002347
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2012.11.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A B Rauzy, 2008. "Some disturbing facts about depth-first left-most variable ordering heuristics for binary decision diagrams," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 222(4), pages 573-582, December.
    2. A. B. Rauzy & J Gauthier & X Leduc, 2007. "Assessment of large automatically generated fault trees by means of binary decision diagrams," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 221(2), pages 95-105, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jung, Woo Sik, 2015. "A method to improve cutset probability calculation in probabilistic safety assessment of nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 134-142.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bjorkman, Kim, 2013. "Solving dynamic flowgraph methodology models using binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 206-216.
    2. Contini, Sergio & Matuzas, Vaidas, 2011. "Analysis of large fault trees based on functional decomposition," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 383-390.
    3. Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina & Rauzy, Antoine & Meléndez, Enrique & Nieto, Francisco, 2010. "Hybrid approach for the assessment of PSA models by means of binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(10), pages 1076-1092.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:111:y:2013:i:c:p:139-146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.