A network-based framework for assessing infrastructure resilience: a case study of the London metro system

Abstract

Modern society is increasingly dependent on the stability of a complex system of interdependent infrastructure sectors. It is imperative to build resilience of large-scale infrastructures like metro systems for addressing the threat of natural disasters and man-made attacks in urban areas. Analysis is needed to ensure that these systems are capable of withstanding and containing unexpected perturbations, and develop heuristic strategies for guiding the design of more resilient networks in the future. We present a comprehensive, multi-pronged framework that analyses information on network topology, spatial organization and passenger flow to understand the resilience of the London metro system. Topology of the London metro system is not fault tolerant in terms of maintaining connectivity at the periphery of the network since it does not exhibit small-world properties. The passenger strength distribution follows a power law, suggesting that while the London metro system is robust to random failures, it is vulnerable to disruptions on a few critical stations. The analysis further identifies particular sources of structural and functional vulnerabilities that need to be mitigated for improving the resilience of the London metro network. The insights from our framework provide useful strategies to build resilience for both existing and upcoming metro systems.

The evolving topology of the Lightning Network: Centralization, efficiency, robustness, synchronization, and anonymity

“…Moreover, we explore the assortativity of the weighted network [15] and we find a slightly disassortative tendency along the entire period, thus placing the LN in analogy with infrastructural networks, such as railway stations [16], national airport systems [17], and information, technological and biological networks [18]. This negative relationship is emphasized in the unweighted version of the network.…”

The role of minimum supply and social vulnerability assessment for governing critical infrastructure failure: current gaps and future agenda

“…The review suggests that the only context in which differential vulnerability within the society is discussed explicitly is the health sector. In a crisis situation with limited availability of medical services, the classification and prioritization of groups of patients, based on survival rates and available resources, seems to be widely accepted across different contexts (Rosenbrock and Gerlinger, 2004;Christian et al, 2014;BSI, 2016). Differences between rural and urban communities are mentioned in case of emergency water supply, where scarcely populated rural areas pose bigger challenges for authorities to provide the statutorily determined minimum supply (BBK, 2013(BBK, , 2016a.…”

Proof of Concept for a Visual Analytics Dashboard for Transportation Network Analysis

“…Many studies tried to analyze different aspects of these type of networks like network centrality [2][3][4][5], vulnerability [6][7][8], reliability [9,10], resilience [11][12][13], flows [14][15][16], etc., and there has been a considerable progress in the past few decades. However, most of the studies are at a theoretical level and the decision-makers need a consistent background in the field of graph theory to perform such analyses and to accurately interpret the results.…”