IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i6p1512-d335702.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Novel Risk-Based Prioritization Approach for Wireless Sensor Network Deployment in Pipeline Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojian Yi

    (School of Mechatronical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
    Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China)

  • Peng Hou

    (School of Mechatronical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

  • Haiping Dong

    (School of Mechatronical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China)

Abstract

In the face of increased spatial distribution and a limited budget, monitoring critical regions of pipeline network is looked upon as an important part of condition monitoring through wireless sensor networks. To achieve this aim, it is necessary to target critical deployed regions rather than the available deployed ones. Unfortunately, the existing approaches face grave challenges due to the vulnerability of identification to human biases and errors. Here, we have proposed a novel approach to determine the criticality of different deployed regions by ranking them based on risk. The probability of occurrence of the failure event in each deployed region is estimated by spatial statistics to measure the uncertainty of risk. The severity of risk consequence is measured for each deployed region based on the total cost caused by failure events. At the same time, hypothesis testing is used before the application of the proposed approach. By validating the availability of the proposed approach, it provides a strong credible basis and the falsifiability for the analytical conclusion. Finally, a case study is used to validate the feasibility of our approach to identify the critical regions. The results of the case study have implications for understanding the spatial heterogeneity of the occurrence of failure in a pipeline network. Meanwhile, the spatial distribution of risk uncertainty is a useful priori knowledge on how to guide the random deployment of wireless sensors, rather than adopting the simple assumption that each sensor has an equal likelihood of being deployed at any location.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojian Yi & Peng Hou & Haiping Dong, 2020. "A Novel Risk-Based Prioritization Approach for Wireless Sensor Network Deployment in Pipeline Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:6:p:1512-:d:335702
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/6/1512/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/6/1512/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Sprent, 2007. "An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 170(4), pages 1178-1178, October.
    2. Marlow, David R. & Beale, David J. & Mashford, John S., 2012. "Risk-based prioritization and its application to inspection of valves in the water sector," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 67-74.
    3. Peter J. Diggle & Barry S. Rowlingson, 1994. "A Conditional Approach to Point Process Modelling of Elevated Risk," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 157(3), pages 433-440, May.
    4. Henry H. Willis, 2007. "Guiding Resource Allocations Based on Terrorism Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 597-606, June.
    5. Barbara Tchórzewska-Cieślak & Katarzyna Pietrucha-Urbanik, 2018. "Approaches to Methods of Risk Analysis and Assessment Regarding the Gas Supply to a City," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-13, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bier, Vicki & Gutfraind, Alexander, 2019. "Risk analysis beyond vulnerability and resilience – characterizing the defensibility of critical systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 626-636.
    2. Agnieszka Kuś & Dorota Grego-Planer, 2021. "A Model of Innovation Activity in Small Enterprises in the Context of Selected Financial Factors: The Example of the Renewable Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, May.
    3. Chen, Shun & Zhao, Xudong & Chen, Zhilong & Hou, Benwei & Wu, Yipeng, 2022. "A game-theoretic method to optimize allocation of defensive resource to protect urban water treatment plants against physical attacks," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    4. Rogerson, Ellen C. & Lambert, James H., 2012. "Prioritizing risks via several expert perspectives with application to runway safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 22-34.
    5. Robin L. Dillon & Robert M. Liebe & Thomas Bestafka, 2009. "Risk‐Based Decision Making for Terrorism Applications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 321-335, March.
    6. Han, Lin & Zhao, Xudong & Chen, Zhilong & Gong, Huadong & Hou, Benwei, 2021. "Assessing resilience of urban lifeline networks to intentional attacks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    7. Lawson, Andrew B. & Simeon, Silvia & Kulldorff, Martin & Biggeri, Annibale & Magnani, Corrado, 2007. "Line and point cluster models for spatial health data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(12), pages 6027-6043, August.
    8. Alberti, Alexandre R. & Cavalcante, Cristiano A.V. & Scarf, Philip & Silva, André L.O., 2018. "Modelling inspection and replacement quality for a protection system," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 145-153.
    9. M. Elisabeth Paté-Cornell, 2012. "Games, Risks, and Analytics: Several Illustrative Cases Involving National Security and Management Situations," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 186-203, June.
    10. Peng Hou & Xiaojian Yi & Haiping Dong, 2020. "A Spatial Statistic Based Risk Assessment Approach to Prioritize the Pipeline Inspection of the Pipeline Network," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    12. Henry H. Willis & Tom LaTourrette, 2008. "Using Probabilistic Terrorism Risk Modeling for Regulatory Benefit‐Cost Analysis: Application to the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative in the Land Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 325-339, April.
    13. Jon T Selvik & Eirik B Abrahamsen, 2017. "On the meaning of accuracy and precision in a risk analysis context," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 231(2), pages 91-100, April.
    14. Kabir, Golam & Tesfamariam, Solomon & Francisque, Alex & Sadiq, Rehan, 2015. "Evaluating risk of water mains failure using a Bayesian belief network model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 220-234.
    15. Mancuso, A. & Compare, M. & Salo, A. & Zio, E. & Laakso, T., 2016. "Risk-based optimization of pipe inspections in large underground networks with imprecise information," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 228-238.
    16. S P Kingham & A C Gatrell & B Rowlingson, 1995. "Testing for Clustering of Health Events within a Geographical Information System Framework," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 27(5), pages 809-821, May.
    17. Davidson, Marty, 2024. "Strategic Point Processes," OSF Preprints g5r9t, Center for Open Science.
    18. Gregory S. Parnell & Christopher M. Smith & Frederick I. Moxley, 2010. "Intelligent Adversary Risk Analysis: A Bioterrorism Risk Management Model," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 32-48, January.
    19. Christoph Werner & Tim Bedford & John Quigley, 2018. "Sequential Refined Partitioning for Probabilistic Dependence Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2683-2702, December.
    20. Cucala, Lionel, 2009. "A flexible spatial scan test for case event data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(8), pages 2843-2850, June.

    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:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:6:p:1512-:d:335702. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.