IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01652234.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Aggregation of importance measures for decision making in reliability engineering

Author

Listed:
  • Michele Compare
  • Michele Bellora
  • Enrico Zio

    (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec, SSEC - Chaire Sciences des Systèmes et Défis Energétiques EDF/ECP/Supélec - Ecole Centrale Paris - Ecole Supérieure d'Electricité - SUPELEC (FRANCE) - CentraleSupélec - EDF R&D - EDF R&D - EDF - EDF)

Abstract

This paper investigates the aggregation of rankings based on component Importance Measures (IMs) to provide the decision maker with a guidance for design or maintenance decisions. In particular, ranking aggregation algorithms of literature are considered, a procedure for ensuring that the aggregated ranking is compliant with the Condorcet criterion of majority principle is presented, and two original ranking aggregation approaches are proposed. Comparisons are made on a case study of an auxiliary feed-water system of a nuclear pressurized water reactor.

Suggested Citation

  • Michele Compare & Michele Bellora & Enrico Zio, 2017. "Aggregation of importance measures for decision making in reliability engineering," Post-Print hal-01652234, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01652234
    DOI: 10.1177/1748006X17694495
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01652234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01652234/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1748006X17694495?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aven, T. & Nøkland, T.E., 2010. "On the use of uncertainty importance measures in reliability and risk analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 127-133.
    2. Young, H. P., 1988. "Condorcet's Theory of Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 1231-1244, December.
    3. DeConde Robert P & Hawley Sarah & Falcon Seth & Clegg Nigel & Knudsen Beatrice & Etzioni Ruth, 2006. "Combining Results of Microarray Experiments: A Rank Aggregation Approach," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, June.
    4. Alessandro Lago & Fortunato Pesarin, 2000. "Nonparametric combiantion of dependent rankings with application to the quality assessment of industrial products," Metron - International Journal of Statistics, Dipartimento di Statistica, Probabilità e Statistiche Applicate - University of Rome, vol. 0(1-2), pages 39-52.
    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. Sudhanshu Aggarwal, 2021. "Minimal path set importance in complex systems," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 235(2), pages 201-208, April.
    2. Xianzhen Huang & Frank PA Coolen, 2018. "Reliability sensitivity analysis of coherent systems based on survival signature," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(6), pages 627-634, December.
    3. Hongyan Dui & Xiaoqian Zheng & Jianjun Guo & Hui Xiao, 2022. "Importance measure-based resilience analysis of a wind power generation system," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 236(3), pages 395-405, June.

    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. Noelia Rico & Camino R. Vela & Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Irene Díaz, 2021. "Reducing the Computational Time for the Kemeny Method by Exploiting Condorcet Properties," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kaplan, Todd R. & Myles, Gareth, 2018. "When costly voting is beneficial," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 33-42.
    3. Marco Marozzi & Mario Bolzan, 2018. "An Index of Household Accessibility to Basic Services: A Study of Italian Regions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 1237-1250, April.
    4. Toyotaka Sakai, 2017. "Considering Collective Choice: The Route 328 Problem in Kodaira City," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 68(3), pages 323-332, September.
    5. Eric Kamwa, 2019. "On the Likelihood of the Borda Effect: The Overall Probabilities for General Weighted Scoring Rules and Scoring Runoff Rules," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 519-541, June.
    6. Stephen Gordon & Michel Truchon, 2008. "Social choice, optimal inference and figure skating," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(2), pages 265-284, February.
    7. Ernst Maug & Bilge Yilmaz, 2002. "Two-Class Voting: A Mechanism for Conflict Resolution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1448-1471, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Andrea Aveni & Ludovico Crippa & Giulio Principi, 2024. "On the Weighted Top-Difference Distance: Axioms, Aggregation, and Approximation," Papers 2403.15198, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    10. Amani Kahloul & Rim Lahmandi-Ayed & Hejer Lasram & Didier Laussel, 2017. "Democracy and competition: Vertical differentiation and labor in a general equilibrium model," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 19(4), pages 860-874, August.
    11. Silviu Pitis & Michael R. Zhang, 2020. "Objective Social Choice: Using Auxiliary Information to Improve Voting Outcomes," Papers 2001.10092, arXiv.org.
    12. Hannu Nurmi & Madeleine O. Hosli, 2003. "Which Decision Rule for the Future Council?," European Union Politics, , vol. 4(1), pages 37-50, March.
    13. Eric Kamwa, 2018. "On the Likelihood of the Borda Effect: The Overall Probabilities for General Weighted Scoring Rules and Scoring Runoff Rules," Working Papers hal-01786590, HAL.
    14. Nehring, Klaus & Pivato, Marcus & Puppe, Clemens, 2011. "Condorcet admissibility: Indeterminacy and path-dependence under majority voting on interconnected decisions," MPRA Paper 32434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Nitzan, Shmuel, 2019. "Skill, value and remuneration in committees," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 93-95.
    16. Martorell, S. & Villamizar, M. & Martón, I. & Villanueva, J.F. & Carlos, S. & Sánchez, A.I., 2014. "Evaluation of risk impact of changes to surveillance requirements addressing model and parameter uncertainties," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 153-165.
    17. Baharad, Eyal & Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Patal, Tal, 2020. "On the merit of non-specialization in the context of majority voting," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 128-133.
    18. Pesenti, Silvana M. & Millossovich, Pietro & Tsanakas, Andreas, 2019. "Reverse sensitivity testing: What does it take to break the model?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 654-670.
    19. Duggan, John & Martinelli, Cesar, 2001. "A Bayesian Model of Voting in Juries," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 259-294, November.
    20. Marcus Pivato, 2013. "Voting rules as statistical estimators," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 581-630, February.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-01652234. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.