IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v167y2017icp184-191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A quantitative model for the risk evaluation of driver-ADAS systems under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Qiu, S.
  • Rachedi, N.
  • Sallak, M.
  • Vanderhaegen, F.

Abstract

In this paper, a quantitative model is proposed to assess the probability of accidents occurring in driver-Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) under uncertainty using Valuation-Based System (VBS). Two kinds of uncertainties are analyzed: data uncertainty related to the states of components, and model uncertainty related to the system structure. The components and the system structure are modeled using variables, spaces of variables, and a set of valuations represented by basic probability assignments (bpas). Besides, the positive influence of learning and cooperation processes is also quantified. Finally, the proposed method is applied to a real use case: the Car Navigation System (CNS).

Suggested Citation

  • Qiu, S. & Rachedi, N. & Sallak, M. & Vanderhaegen, F., 2017. "A quantitative model for the risk evaluation of driver-ADAS systems under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 184-191.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:167:y:2017:i:c:p:184-191
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2017.05.028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832017305951
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2017.05.028?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. Dubois, Didier, 2006. "Possibility theory and statistical reasoning," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 47-69, November.
    2. Aven, T., 2011. "Interpretations of alternative uncertainty representations in a reliability and risk analysis context," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 353-360.
    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. Qiu, Siqi & Sallak, Mohamed & Schön, Walter & Ming, Henry X.G., 2018. "Extended LK heuristics for the optimization of linear consecutive-k-out-of-n: F systems considering parametric uncertainty and model uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 51-61.
    2. Bolbot, Victor & Theotokatos, Gerasimos & Bujorianu, Luminita Manuela & Boulougouris, Evangelos & Vassalos, Dracos, 2019. "Vulnerabilities and safety assurance methods in Cyber-Physical Systems: A comprehensive review," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 179-193.

    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. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio, 2013. "Uncertainty Analysis in Fault Tree Models with Dependent Basic Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1146-1173, June.
    2. Roger Flage & Terje Aven & Enrico Zio & Piero Baraldi, 2014. "Concerns, Challenges, and Directions of Development for the Issue of Representing Uncertainty in Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1196-1207, July.
    3. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A critical discussion and practical recommendations on some issues relevant to the non-probabilistic treatment of uncertainty in engineering risk assessment," Post-Print hal-01652230, HAL.
    4. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A Critical Discussion and Practical Recommendations on Some Issues Relevant to the Nonprobabilistic Treatment of Uncertainty in Engineering Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(7), pages 1315-1340, July.
    5. Qiu, Siqi & Ming, Xinguo, 2020. "An extended Birnbaum importance-based two-stage heuristic for component assignment problems under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    6. Li, Yanfu & Zio, Enrico, 2012. "Uncertainty analysis of the adequacy assessment model of a distributed generation system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 235-244.
    7. Felipe Aguirre & Mohamed Sallak & Walter Schön & Fabien Belmonte, 2013. "Application of evidential networks in quantitative analysis of railway accidents," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 227(4), pages 368-384, August.
    8. Bjørnsen, Kjartan & Selvik, Jon Tømmerås & Aven, Terje, 2019. "A semi-quantitative assessment process for improved use of the expected value of information measure in safety management," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 494-502.
    9. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    10. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    11. Gia Sirbiladze & Irina Khutsishvili & Otar Badagadze & Mikheil Kapanadze, 2016. "More Precise Decision-Making Methodology in the Temporalized Body of Evidence. Application in the Information Technology Management," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1469-1502, November.
    12. Abokersh, Mohamed Hany & Vallès, Manel & Cabeza, Luisa F. & Boer, Dieter, 2020. "A framework for the optimal integration of solar assisted district heating in different urban sized communities: A robust machine learning approach incorporating global sensitivity analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).
    13. Baraldi, Piero & Podofillini, Luca & Mkrtchyan, Lusine & Zio, Enrico & Dang, Vinh N., 2015. "Comparing the treatment of uncertainty in Bayesian networks and fuzzy expert systems used for a human reliability analysis application," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 176-193.
    14. Pasanisi, Alberto & Keller, Merlin & Parent, Eric, 2012. "Estimation of a quantity of interest in uncertainty analysis: Some help from Bayesian decision theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-101.
    15. Goerlandt, Floris & Montewka, Jakub, 2015. "Maritime transportation risk analysis: Review and analysis in light of some foundational issues," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 115-134.
    16. Roger Flage & Terje Aven & Piero Baraldi & Enrico Zio, 2012. "An imprecision importance measure for uncertainty representations interpreted as lower and upper probabilities, with special emphasis on possibility theory," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(6), pages 656-665, December.
    17. Mavromatidis, Georgios & Orehounig, Kristina & Carmeliet, Jan, 2018. "A review of uncertainty characterisation approaches for the optimal design of distributed energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 258-277.
    18. Yu, Xuchao & Liang, Wei & Zhang, Laibin & Reniers, Genserik & Lu, Linlin, 2018. "Risk assessment of the maintenance process for onshore oil and gas transmission pipelines under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 50-67.
    19. Rachida Hennani & Michel Terraza, 2012. "Value-at-Risk stressée chaotique d’un portefeuille bancaire," Working Papers 12-23, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Sep 2012.
    20. Céline Baud & Nathalie Lallemand-Stempak, 2024. "Quantitative technologies and reflexivity: The role of tools and their layouts in the case of credit risk management," Post-Print hal-04419872, HAL.

    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:167:y:2017:i:c:p:184-191. 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.