2018
DOI: 10.1111/mice.12380
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Methodology to Account for One‐Way Infrastructure Interdependency in Preservation Activity Scheduling

Abstract: This article develops an optimization framework for scheduling a programmable preservation activity for an infrastructure (primary) system that accounts for a specific context of interdependency between its maintenance phase and the operations phase of a neighboring (secondary) system. The framework identifies the optimal deterioration threshold of the primary system for the preservation activity, subject to a disruption in the operations of the neighboring system. The methodology also includes trade-off analy… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Several studies have proposed approaches to assess the reliability, resilience, vulnerability, and failure process of power, transportation, and water supply networks individually (Barabási & Albert, 1999; Buldyrev, Parshani, Paul, Stanley, & Havlin, 2010; Jenelius & Mattsson, 2012; Ouyang & Fang, 2017; Pietrucha‐Urbanik & Tchórzewska‐Cieślak, 2018; Sumalee & Kurauchi, 2006; Ulak, Kocatepe, Sriram, Ozguven, & Arghandeh, 2018). However, these critical infrastructures are interconnected and interdependent (Alinizzi, Chen, Labi, & Kandil, 2018; Homeland Security, 2019; Martani, Jin, Soga, & Scholtes, 2016). Considering the increased connectedness and interdependencies among infrastructure systems, studies have proposed a holistic approach to assess the resilience to disruptions (Hasan & Foliente, 2015; Lu et al., 2018; Pant, Thacker, Hall, Alderson, & Barr, 2018; Rinaldi, Peerenboom, & Kelly, 2001; Sriram et al., 2019).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have proposed approaches to assess the reliability, resilience, vulnerability, and failure process of power, transportation, and water supply networks individually (Barabási & Albert, 1999; Buldyrev, Parshani, Paul, Stanley, & Havlin, 2010; Jenelius & Mattsson, 2012; Ouyang & Fang, 2017; Pietrucha‐Urbanik & Tchórzewska‐Cieślak, 2018; Sumalee & Kurauchi, 2006; Ulak, Kocatepe, Sriram, Ozguven, & Arghandeh, 2018). However, these critical infrastructures are interconnected and interdependent (Alinizzi, Chen, Labi, & Kandil, 2018; Homeland Security, 2019; Martani, Jin, Soga, & Scholtes, 2016). Considering the increased connectedness and interdependencies among infrastructure systems, studies have proposed a holistic approach to assess the resilience to disruptions (Hasan & Foliente, 2015; Lu et al., 2018; Pant, Thacker, Hall, Alderson, & Barr, 2018; Rinaldi, Peerenboom, & Kelly, 2001; Sriram et al., 2019).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The aforementioned interconnection of systems is often referred to as interdependency, which, in the case of infrastructure systems, may occur between different types of systems, between different stages of system development, and between the different operational and maintenance phases of systems [37]. Interdependencies have a significant impact on the disruption dynamics of critical infrastructure.…”
Section: Interdependenciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interdependencies can act as an intensifying structure as they transport effects from different levels and places to others [38]. It is also worth noting that the diversity of systems, together with the interdependencies between them, make urban areas vulnerable to cascading effects [37].…”
Section: Interdependenciesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation (MRR) activities, whether reactive or preventive, are usually implemented to restore the structural integrity and operational functionality to a superior level so as to keep the asset system working properly. As an MRR activity does not necessarily recover an asset to an as‐good‐as‐new state, it is imperative to consider both asset deterioration and maintenance effectiveness in long‐term performance prediction and capital planning (Alinizzi, Chen, Labi, & Kandil, ; El Hajj, Schoefs, Castanier, & Yeung, ; Labi & Sinha, ; Memarzadeh & Pozzi, ; Smith Freeman, & Pendleton, ; Sousa, Alçada‐Almeida, & Coutinho‐Rodrigues, ). While the significance has been long recognized (e.g., Lytton, ; Markow, ; Rajagopal & George, ), the modeling of maintenance effectiveness has been until now mainly limited in pavement research (e.g., Ouyang & Madanat ; Pantelias & Zhang, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the significance has been long recognized (e.g., Lytton, 1987;Markow, 1991;Rajagopal & George, 1991), the modeling of maintenance effectiveness has been until now mainly limited in pavement research (e.g., Ouyang & Madanat 2004;Pantelias & Zhang, 2009). Outside of pavement management, maintenance effectiveness was often integrated into the partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) models (Alinizzi et al, 2018;Memarzadeh & Pozzi, 2016;Osman, Atef, & Moselhi, 2012;Papakonstantinou, Andriotis, & Shinozuka, 2018;Pozzi, Memarzadeh, & Klima, 2017;Srinivasan & Parlikad, 2013;Thöns, 2018;Van Erp & Orcesi, 2018). However, these POMDP studies take an assumed maintenance effectiveness model with little empirical support, if any at all.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%