Advances in Applied Probability

On comparing coherent systems with heterogeneous components

Francisco J. Samaniego and Jorge Navarro

Full-text: Access denied (no subscription detected)

We're sorry, but we are unable to provide you with the full text of this article because we are not able to identify you as a subscriber. If you have a personal subscription to this journal, then please login. If you are already logged in, then you may need to update your profile to register your subscription. Read more about accessing full-text

Abstract

In this paper we investigate different methods that may be used to compare coherent systems having heterogeneous components. We consider both the case of systems with independent components and the case of systems with dependent components. In the first case, the comparisons are based on the new concept of the survival signature due to Coolen and Coolen-Maturi (2012) which extends the well-known concept of system signatures to the case of components with lifetimes that need not be independent and identically distributed. In the second case, the comparisons are based on the concept of distortion functions. A graphical procedure (called an RR-plot) is proposed as an alternative to the analytical methods when there are two types of components.

Article information

Source
Adv. in Appl. Probab., Volume 48, Number 1 (2016), 88-111.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 8 March 2016

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aap/1457466157

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3473569

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1336.60034

Subjects
Primary: 60E15: Inequalities; stochastic orderings
Secondary: 60K10: Applications (reliability, demand theory, etc.)

Keywords
Coherent system system signature survival signature distorted distribution stochastic order

Citation

Samaniego, Francisco J.; Navarro, Jorge. On comparing coherent systems with heterogeneous components. Adv. in Appl. Probab. 48 (2016), no. 1, 88--111. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aap/1457466157


Export citation

References

  • Al-Nefaiee, A. H. and Coolen, F. P. A. (2013). Nonparametric predictive inference for system failure time based on bounds for the signature. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engineers O 227, 513–522.
  • Arcones, M. A., Kvam, P. H. and Samaniego, F. J. (2002). Nonparametric estimation of a distribution subject to a stochastic precedence constraint. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 97, 170–182.
  • Aslett, L. J. M., Coolen, F. P. A. and Wilson, S. P. (2015). Bayesian inference for reliability of systems and networks using the survival signature. Risk Analysis 35, 1640–1651.
  • Barlow, R. E. and Proschan, F. (1975). Statistical Theory of Reliability and Life Testing: Probability Models. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
  • Boland, P. J. (2001). Signatures of indirect majority systems. J. Appl. Prob. 38, 597–603.
  • Coolen, F. P. A. and Al-Nefaiee, A. H. (2012). Nonparametric predictive inference for failure times of systems with exchangeable components. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engineers O 226, 262–273.
  • Coolen, F. P. A. and Coolen-Maturi, T. (2012). On generalizing the signature to systems with multiple types of components. In Complex Systems and Dependability, eds W. Zamojski et al., Springer, Berlin, pp. 115–130.
  • Coolen, F. P. A., Coolen-Maturi, T. and Al-Nefaiee, A. H. (2014). Nonparametric predictive inference for system reliability using the survival signature. Proc. Inst. Mech. Engineers O 228, 437–448.
  • Hollander, M. and Samaniego, F. J. (2008). The use of stochastic precedence in the comparison of engineered systems. In Advances in Mathematical Modeling for Reliability, IOS, Amsterdam, pp. 129–137.
  • Hürlimann, W. (2004). Distortion risk measures and economic capital. N. Amer. Actuarial J. 8, 86–95.
  • Kamińska-Zabierowska, M. and Navarro, J. (2015). Erratum to: Mixture representations of residual lifetimes of used systems. J. Appl. Prob. 52.4, 1183–1186.
  • Kochar, S., Mukerjee, H. and Samaniego, F. J. (1999). The `signature' of a coherent system and its application to comparisons among systems. Naval Res. Logistics 46, 507–523.
  • Lindqvist, B. H. and Samaniego, F. J. (2016). On the equivalence of systems of different sizes. To appear in
  • Adv. Appl. Prob.
  • Marichal, J.-L. and Mathonet, P. (2013). On the extensions of Barlow–Proschan importance index and system signature to dependent lifetimes. J. Multivariate Anal. 115, 48–56.
  • Navarro, J. and Rubio, R. (2010). Comparisons of coherent systems using stochastic precedence. TEST 19, 469–486.
  • Navarro, J., Pellerey, F. and Di Crescenzo, A. (2015). Orderings of coherent systems with randomized dependent components. Europ. J. Operat. Res. 240, 127–139.
  • Navarro, J., Samaniego, F. J. and Balakrishnan, N. (2010). The joint signature of coherent systems with shared components. J. Appl. Prob. 47, 235–253.
  • Navarro, J., Samaniego, F. J. and Balakrishnan, N. (2011). Signature-based representations for the reliability of systems with heterogeneous components. J. Appl. Prob. 48, 856–867.
  • Navarro, J., Samaniego, F. J. and Balakrishnan, N. (2013). Mixture representations for the joint distribution of lifetimes of two coherent systems with shared components. Adv. Appl. Prob. 45, 1011–1027.
  • Navarro, J., del Aguila, Y., Sordo, M. A. and Suárez-Llorens, A. (2013). Stochastic ordering properties for systems with dependent identically distributed components. Appl. Stoch. Models Business Industry 29, 264–278.
  • Navarro, J., del Águila, Y., Sordo, M. A. and Suárez-Llorens, A. (2014). Preservation of reliability classes under the formation of coherent systems. Appl. Stoch. Models Business Industry 30, 444–454.
  • Navarro, J., del Águila, Y., Sordo, M. A. and Suárez-Llorens, A. (2016). Preservation of stochastic orders under the formation of generalized distorted distributions. Applications to coherent systems and other concepts. To appear in Methodology Comput. Appl, Prob. DOI: 10.1007/s11009-015-9441-z. First published online 28 February 2015.
  • Navarro, J., Samaniego, F. J., Balakrishnan, N. and Bhattacharya, D. (2008). On the application and extension of system signatures in engineering reliability. Naval Res. Logistics 55, 313–327.
  • Quiggin, J. (1982). A theory of anticipated utility. J. Econom. Behavior Organization 3, 323–343.
  • Samaniego, F. J. (1985). On closure of the IFR class under formation of coherent systems. IEEE Trans. Reliability 34, 69–72.
  • Samaniego, F. J. (2006). On the comparison of engineered systems of different sizes. In Proc. Army Conf. Appl. Statist. (Durham, NC), NISS.
  • Samaniego, F. J. (2007). System Signatures and their Applications in Engineering Reliability. Springer, New York.
  • Satyanarayana, A. and Prabhakar, A. (1978). New topological formula and rapid algorithm for reliability analysis of complex networks. IEEE Trans. Reliability 27, 82–100.
  • Shaked, M. and Shanthikumar, J. G. (2007). Stochastic Orders. Springer, New York.
  • Wang, S. (1996). Premium calculation by transforming the layer premium density. ASTIN Bull. 26, 71–92.
  • Wang, S. S. and Young, V. R. (1998). Ordering risks: expected utility theory versus Yaari's dual theory of risk. Insurance Math. Econom. 22, 145–161.
  • Yaari, M. E. (1987). The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica 55, 95–115.