A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A multi-objective systems reliability approach for infrastructure design under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty
Highlights Fostering communication of risk and reliability, and infrastructure performance. Providing a decision support system for treatment of error in early design. Integrating and assessing multiple decision maker preferences. Providing the same level of satisfaction with varying decision criteria values. Reaching consensus on the optimal design configuration.
Abstract Robust structural design requires joint consideration of both aleatory (random) and epistemic (lack of knowledge) uncertainty. In a multi-objective decision-making context, aleatory uncertainties are associated with uncertainty inherent to the built environment, whereas epistemic uncertainties accrue due to imperfect representation of decision maker values. This paper presents a systematic decision framework for combining treatment of these types of uncertainties using the First Order Reliability Method (FORM). Probabilistic descriptions of the performance of various alternative structural design configurations are combined with decision maker defined utility functions (indifference curves) that are subjected to epistemic uncertainty, supporting assessment of the sensitivity of the decision analysis results to various sources of error. The proposed decision analysis model allows full and consistent representation of all relevant uncertainties, multiple decision maker utilities, alternative design configurations, and alternative decision criteria. A demonstration identifies the optimal of 12 alternative configurations of a nine-story office building with the decision variables of building damage and business interruption cost, casualty cost, and CO2 emission cost under aleatory and epistemic uncertainties.
A multi-objective systems reliability approach for infrastructure design under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty
Highlights Fostering communication of risk and reliability, and infrastructure performance. Providing a decision support system for treatment of error in early design. Integrating and assessing multiple decision maker preferences. Providing the same level of satisfaction with varying decision criteria values. Reaching consensus on the optimal design configuration.
Abstract Robust structural design requires joint consideration of both aleatory (random) and epistemic (lack of knowledge) uncertainty. In a multi-objective decision-making context, aleatory uncertainties are associated with uncertainty inherent to the built environment, whereas epistemic uncertainties accrue due to imperfect representation of decision maker values. This paper presents a systematic decision framework for combining treatment of these types of uncertainties using the First Order Reliability Method (FORM). Probabilistic descriptions of the performance of various alternative structural design configurations are combined with decision maker defined utility functions (indifference curves) that are subjected to epistemic uncertainty, supporting assessment of the sensitivity of the decision analysis results to various sources of error. The proposed decision analysis model allows full and consistent representation of all relevant uncertainties, multiple decision maker utilities, alternative design configurations, and alternative decision criteria. A demonstration identifies the optimal of 12 alternative configurations of a nine-story office building with the decision variables of building damage and business interruption cost, casualty cost, and CO2 emission cost under aleatory and epistemic uncertainties.
A multi-objective systems reliability approach for infrastructure design under aleatory and epistemic uncertainty
Shahtaheri, Yasaman (author) / Rodriguez-Marek, Adrian (author) / de la Garza, Jesús M. (author) / Flint, Madeleine M. (author)
Structural Safety ; 89
2020-11-23
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
| British Library Online Contents | 2017
| British Library Online Contents | 2010
Aleatory or epistemic? Does it matter?
| Online Contents | 2009
Aleatory or epistemic? Does it matter?
| British Library Online Contents | 2009