IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v242y2024ics0951832023006397.html

Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment with K-shortest-paths planning for generating discrete dynamic event trees

Author

Listed:
  • Maidana, Renan G.
  • Parhizkar, Tarannom
  • Martin, Gabriel San
  • Utne, Ingrid B.

Abstract

Conventional risk assessment methods are often not well suited for fast-changing dynamic and complex systems since the results from the analysis may be averages or valid for a short time before the system’s state changes. A response to this problem is dynamic probabilistic risk assessment (DPRA), which considers the ever-changing nature of such systems and how their dynamic behavior affects the likelihood of future accident scenarios. Performing DPRA is difficult for complex systems — i.e., systems with many interconnected subsystems and components, for example, autonomous systems. There is a combinatorial “explosion†when considering how component failures affect one another and the overall system performance, known in the DPRA literature as the “state explosion problem†, causing DPRA methods to have poor computational performance for large-scale systems. Although solutions to state explosion alleviate the average-case performance, most DPRA methods remain computationally expensive, with exponential worst-case time complexities. In this paper, a method for solving DPRA problems with K-Shortest-Paths planning algorithms is proposed. The method, called KPRA, consists in framing a subset of DPRA problems as relaxed versions of the K-Shortest-Paths (KSP) planning problem, allowing these DPRA problems to be solved by a graph search algorithm called K*, which has a theoretical log-linear worst-case complexity. Therefore, in theory, KPRA with K* solves DPRA problems with computational performance better than exponential. KPRA was implemented and applied to a case study of DPRA for an autonomous ship for validation and comparison with conventional DPRA methods. The case study consists of two ships, one of them autonomous, in a crossing encounter with a possible collision risk. The task is to find the most critical situations for the autonomous ship, i.e., the scenarios where its collision risk is the highest. KPRA’s performance in solving the case study is compared with two conventional DPRA methods. The results show that the KPRA implementation in this work can solve the case study, i.e., produce an output equivalent to the other methods, with a polynomial worst-case computational complexity, i.e., more efficiently than the other methods with exponential complexities.

Suggested Citation

  • Maidana, Renan G. & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Martin, Gabriel San & Utne, Ingrid B., 2024. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment with K-shortest-paths planning for generating discrete dynamic event trees," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:242:y:2024:i:c:s0951832023006397
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2023.109725
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832023006397
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109725?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hu, Yunwei & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Mosleh, Ali, 2022. "Guided simulation for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of complex systems: Concept, method, and application," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    2. Catalyurek, Umit & Rutt, Benjamin & Metzroth, Kyle & Hakobyan, Aram & Aldemir, Tunc & Denning, Richard & Dunagan, Sean & Kunsman, David, 2010. "Development of a code-agnostic computational infrastructure for the dynamic generation of accident progression event trees," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 278-294.
    3. Zheng, Xiaoyu & Tamaki, Hitoshi & Sugiyama, Tomoyuki & Maruyama, Yu, 2022. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plants using multi-fidelity simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    4. Maidana, Renan G. & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Gomola, Alojz & Utne, Ingrid B. & Mosleh, Ali, 2023. "Supervised dynamic probabilistic risk assessment: Review and comparison of methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    5. Nejad, Hamed S. & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Mosleh, Ali, 2022. "Automatic generation of event sequence diagrams for guiding simulation based dynamic probabilistic risk assessment (SIMPRA) of complex systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    6. Jin Y. Yen, 1971. "Finding the K Shortest Loopless Paths in a Network," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(11), pages 712-716, July.
    7. Thieme, Christoph A. & Mosleh, Ali & Utne, Ingrid B. & Hegde, Jeevith, 2020. "Incorporating software failure in risk analysis – Part 1: Software functional failure mode classification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    8. Davide Castelvecchi, 2016. "Can we open the black box of AI?," Nature, Nature, vol. 538(7623), pages 20-23, October.
    9. Park, Jong Woo & Lee, Seung Jun, 2022. "Simulation optimization framework for dynamic probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    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. Qiao, Yidan & Gao, Xinwei & Ma, Lin & Chen, Dengkai, 2024. "Dynamic human error risk assessment of group decision-making in extreme cooperative scenario," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    2. Wang, Nanxi & Yuen, Kum Fai & Li, Duowei & Wong, Yiik Diew & Tan, Kim Hock, 2026. "A bayesian network approach to ship safety assessment: integrating machine learning and expert opinions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 266(PA).
    3. Park, Jooyoung & Boring, Ronald L., 2025. "Dynamic human reliability analysis using the EMRALD dynamic risk assessment tool," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 264(PA).
    4. Zhen, Rong & Dong, Han & Qiao, Qian & Wu, Bing, 2026. "A novel method for identifying key focus ships in a complex network based on ship collision risks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 265(PA).
    5. Zhang, Jinghan & Zio, Enrico & Ma, Chiye & Liu, Kang & Wang, Wei, 2025. "A probabilistic cost-benefit analysis approach for cyberattack path evaluation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).

    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. Park, Jinkyun & Kim, Hyeonmin, 2024. "A case study to address the limitation of accident scenario identifications with respect to diverse manual responses," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    2. Antonello, Federico & Buongiorno, Jacopo & Zio, Enrico, 2022. "A methodology to perform dynamic risk assessment using system theory and modeling and simulation: Application to nuclear batteries," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    3. Wang, Yuchen & Ji, Zuzhen & Cao, Yi & Yang, Shuang-Hua, 2025. "Dynamic risk assessment for process operational safety based on reachability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    4. Lilli, Giordano & Sanavia, Matteo & Oboe, Roberto & Vianello, Chiara & Manzolaro, Mattia & De Ruvo, Pasquale Luca & Andrighetto, Alberto, 2024. "A semi-quantitative risk assessment of remote handling operations on the SPES Front-End based on HAZOP-LOPA," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    5. Jo, Wooseok & Lee, Seung Jun, 2024. "Human reliability evaluation method covering operator action timing for dynamic probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    6. Maidana, Renan G. & Parhizkar, Tarannom & Gomola, Alojz & Utne, Ingrid B. & Mosleh, Ali, 2023. "Supervised dynamic probabilistic risk assessment: Review and comparison of methods," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    7. Wang, Chenyushu & Cai, Baoping & Shao, Xiaoyan & Zhao, Liqian & Sui, Zhongfei & Liu, Keyang & Khan, Javed Akbar & Gao, Lei, 2023. "Dynamic risk assessment methodology of operation process for deepwater oil and gas equipment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    8. 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).
    9. Pan, Xing & Du, Hengte & Yu, Haofan, 2024. "A method for safety analysis of human-machine systems based on dynamic Bayesian simulation," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    10. Zheng, Xiaoyu & Tamaki, Hitoshi & Sugiyama, Tomoyuki & Maruyama, Yu, 2022. "Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plants using multi-fidelity simulations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    11. Park, Jong Woo & Lee, Seung Jun, 2022. "Simulation optimization framework for dynamic probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    12. Jo, Wooseok & Bae, Junyong & Kim, Dong-San & Lee, Seung Jun, 2026. "Automatic accident sequence generation using optimized simulations for dynamic probabilistic safety assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 266(PA).
    13. Park, Jooyoung & Boring, Ronald L., 2025. "Dynamic human reliability analysis using the EMRALD dynamic risk assessment tool," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 264(PA).
    14. Xianmin Wang & Shuwang Wu & Zixiang Zhao & Haixiang Guo & Wenxue Chen, 2025. "Optimization of emergency rescue routes after a violent earthquake," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(4), pages 4585-4613, March.
    15. Huili Zhang & Yinfeng Xu & Xingang Wen, 2015. "Optimal shortest path set problem in undirected graphs," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 511-530, April.
    16. Yong Peng & Shuxiang Lin & Jiachen Niu & Hanliang Fu & Chaojie Fan, 2025. "Cleanformer: A Confident Learning Based ERP Label Denoising Framework for Public Attitude Assessment to Recycled Water," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 39(1), pages 127-144, January.
    17. Dandan Xu & Rui Xue & Mengyuan Luo & Wenhuan Wang & Wei Zhang & Yinghui Wang, 2025. "Advances in Dissolved Organic Carbon Remote Sensing Inversion in Inland Waters: Methodologies, Challenges, and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-35, July.
    18. Picoco, Claudia & Rychkov, Valentin & Aldemir, Tunc, 2020. "A framework for verifying Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment models," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    19. Li, Jin-Yang & Lu, Jubin & Zhou, Hao, 2023. "Reliability analysis of structures with inerter-based isolation layer under stochastic seismic excitations," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    20. Zhou, Zhipeng & Zhuo, Wen & Cui, Jianqiang & Luan, Haiying & Chen, Yudi & Lin, Dong, 2025. "Developing a deep reinforcement learning model for safety risk prediction at subway construction sites," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 257(PB).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:reensy:v:242:y:2024:i:c:s0951832023006397. 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.