IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v95y2010i10p1076-1092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hybrid approach for the assessment of PSA models by means of binary decision diagrams

Author

Listed:
  • Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina
  • Rauzy, Antoine
  • Meléndez, Enrique
  • Nieto, Francisco

Abstract

Binary decision diagrams are a well-known alternative to the minimal cutsets approach to assess the reliability Boolean models. They have been applied successfully to improve the fault trees models assessment. However, its application to solve large models, and in particular the event trees coming from the PSA studies of the nuclear industry, remains to date out of reach of an exact evaluation. For many real PSA models it may be not possible to compute the BDD within reasonable amount of time and memory without considering the truncation or simplification of the model.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:95:y:2010:i:10:p:1076-1092
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2010.04.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832010001018
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2010.04.016?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. Jung, Woo Sik & Yang, Joon-Eon & Ha, Jaejoo, 2005. "Development of measures to estimate truncation error in fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 30-36.
    2. 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.
    3. C Ibáñez-Llano & A Rauzy & E Meléndez & F Nieto, 2009. "Minimal cutsets-based reduction approach for the use of binary decision diagrams on probabilistic safety assessment fault tree models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 223(4), pages 301-311, December.
    4. Contini, S. & Cojazzi, G.G.M. & Renda, G., 2008. "On the use of non-coherent fault trees in safety and security studies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(12), pages 1886-1895.
    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. Zaitseva, Elena & Levashenko, Vitaly & Rabcan, Jan, 2023. "A new method for analysis of Multi-State systems based on Multi-valued decision diagram under epistemic uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    2. Vaidas Matuzas & Sergio Contini, 2012. "On the efficiency of functional decomposition in fault tree analysis," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(6), pages 635-645, December.
    3. Matuzas, V. & Contini, S., 2015. "Dynamic labelling of BDD and ZBDD for efficient non-coherent fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 183-192.
    4. 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.

    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. Ibáñez-Llano, Cristina & Rauzy, Antoine & Meléndez, Enrique & Nieto, Francisco, 2010. "A reduction approach to improve the quantification of linked fault trees through binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(12), pages 1314-1323.
    2. 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.
    3. Bjorkman, Kim, 2013. "Solving dynamic flowgraph methodology models using binary decision diagrams," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 206-216.
    4. Piètre-Cambacédès, L. & Bouissou, M., 2013. "Cross-fertilization between safety and security engineering," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 110-126.
    5. 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.
    6. Park, Jinkyun & Jung, Wondea, 2015. "A systematic framework to investigate the coverage of abnormal operating procedures in nuclear power plants," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 21-30.
    7. Vaidas Matuzas & Sergio Contini, 2012. "On the efficiency of functional decomposition in fault tree analysis," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(6), pages 635-645, December.
    8. Tyrväinen, T., 2013. "Risk importance measures in the dynamic flowgraph methodology," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 35-50.
    9. Duflot, Nicolas & Bérenguer, Christophe & Dieulle, Laurence & Vasseur, Dominique, 2009. "A min cut-set-wise truncation procedure for importance measures computation in probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(11), pages 1827-1837.
    10. Matuzas, V. & Contini, S., 2015. "Dynamic labelling of BDD and ZBDD for efficient non-coherent fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 183-192.
    11. Vaurio, Jussi K., 2016. "Importances of components and events in non-coherent systems and risk models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 117-122.
    12. Contini, Sergio & Matuzas, Vaidas, 2011. "New methods to determine the importance measures of initiating and enabling events in fault tree analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(7), pages 775-784.
    13. Tyrväinen, Tero, 2016. "Prime implicants in dynamic reliability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 39-46.
    14. Mo, Yuchang, 2013. "Can we trust module-respect heuristics?," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 139-146.
    15. Takeda, Satoshi & Kitada, Takanori, 2023. "Importance measure evaluation based on sensitivity coefficient for probabilistic risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    16. Nývlt, Ondřej & Rausand, Marvin, 2012. "Dependencies in event trees analyzed by Petri nets," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 45-57.
    17. S Contini & V Matuzas, 2012. "Coupling decomposition and truncation for the analysis of complex fault trees," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 226(3), pages 249-261, June.
    18. Lu, Ji-Min & Wu, Xiao-Yue & Liu, Yiliu & Ann Lundteigen, Mary, 2015. "Reliability analysis of large phased-mission systems with repairable components based on success-state sampling," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 123-133.

    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:95:y:2010:i:10:p:1076-1092. 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.