On the method of risk synthesis in the safety management of structurally complex systems

The Aim of the paper is to show that the risk to critical infrastructure facilities (CIF) of structurally complex systems (SCS) should be considered as a multicomponent vector, whose set of parameters is subject to changes. Real safety estimation using the risk-oriented approach is impossible without a sufficient base of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of risk factors, as well as data on the status of facilities and processes that are exposed to such risk factors. Risk assessment always aims to estimate its quantitative indicators, which allows it to be used not only to assess industrial safety, but also to substantiate the economic efficiency of taken measures, conduct economic calculations of the required relief or compensation of lost health of workers and environmental damage.

Method. The author suggests a method of risk synthesis (with game definition of the problem of countering possible external effects of various nature on CIF SCS) as one of the foundations of the design of advanced systems for monitoring safety threats to SCS. A special attention must be given to the effect of risk factors on the system of balanced safety and risk indicators, as prediction based on single indicators does not create a holistic image of the systems’ status and development trends.

Result. Key methodological premises were formulated: from general problem definition of safety management through the synthesis the model of a controlled facility and its external and internal connections, solution to the problem of selection of priority protection facilities in terms of assuring efficient operation and general safety of SCS. As the basis of advanced systems for monitoring safety threats and risks, the paper suggests the concept of risk management aiming to create the mechanism, method and tools for the synthesis, analysis and prediction of emergency risks.

Conclusion. The proposed method can be applied to a wide range of tasks of primary analysis, synthesis and quantitative estimation of the CIF-related risks and safety management of SCS of various purpose.

1. Bochkov A.V. On the nature of risk in the safety management of structurally complex systems. Dependability. 2019;4:54-66. URL: https://doi.org/:10.21683/1729-26462019-19-4-54-66.

2. Bochkov A.V., Ushakov I.A. Solving the task of resources allocation for critical infrastructure protection against terrorist attacks based on subjective expert estimate. Dependability. 2015;1:88-96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.21683/1729-2646-2015-0-1-88-96

3. Bochkov A.V., Zhigirev N.N., Lesnykh V.V. Dynamic Multi Criteria Decision Making Method for Sustainability Risk Analysis of Structurally Complex TechnoEconomic Systems. Reliability: Theory & Applications. 2012;1;2(25):36-42.

4. Bochkov A.V., Zhigirev N.N. Ram M., Davim J., editors. Development of Computation Algorithm and Ranking Methods for Decision-Making under Uncertainty. Advanced Mathematical Techniques in Engineering Science. CRC Press. Series: Science, Technology and Management. 2018;May, 17:121-154.

5. Lefebvre V.A. Conflicting structures. Moscow: Sovietskoie radio; 1973.

6. Muschick E., Muller P. Methods of engineering decision-making. Moscow: Mir; 1990.

7. Popov E.V., Fomin I.B., Kisel E.B. et al. [Statistical and dynamic expert systems]. Мoscow: Finansy i statistika; 1996. (in Russ.)

8. Hajek P., Havranek T. Mechanizing hypothesis formation. Moscow: Nauka; 1984.

9. [Fuzzy sets and possibility theory]. Moscow: Radio i sviaz; 1986. (in Russ.)

10. Podinovsky V.V., Nogin V.D. [Pareto-optimal solutions of multicriterion problems]. Moscow: Nauka; 1982. (in Russ.)

11. Jambu M. Classification automatique pour l’analyse des données. Мoscow: Finansy i statistika; 1988.

12. Price K.V. Genetic Annealing. Dr. Dobb’s Journal. 1994;19(11):117.

13. Ebeling W., Engel A., Feistel R. Physik der Evolutionsprozesse. Moscow: Editorial URSS; 2001.

14. Gilmore R. Catastrophe theory for scientists and engineers. Moscow: Mir; 1984.

15. Guts A.K., Korobitsyn V.V. [Mathematical models of social systems: Study guide in 2 volumes]. Omsk: OmSU; 2000. (in Russ.)

16. Specht D. Probabilistic Neural Networks. Neural Networks;1990:1.

17. Kohonen T. Self-Organizing Maps. Springer-Verlag; 1995.

18. Fritzke B. Tessauro G., Touretsky D.S., Leen T.K., editors. A growing neural gas network learns topologies. Advanced in Neural Information Processing Systems 7. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press; 1995.

19. Glushkov V.V., Ivanov V.V., Yanenko V.M. [Simulation of evolutionary systems]. Moscow: Nauka. Main office of physics and mathematics; 1983. (in Russ.)

20. Nikolis G., Prigozhin I. Chizmazhev Yu.A., editor. [Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems]. Мoscow: Mir; 1979. (in Russ.)

21. Reutov A.P., Savchenko R.G., Suslov R.M. [System model as a relation of generalized properties: order, dependability and efficiency]. In: [Matters of cybernetics (system development management)]. Мoscow: 1979. (in Russ.) Moscow: 1979. 26 – 34.

22. Romanovsky Yu.M. [Self-organization processes in physics, chemistry and biology]. Moscow: Znanie; 1981. (in Russ.)

23. Ganti T. A theory of Biomedical supersystems and its application to problems of natural and artificial biogenesis. Budapest: Akademiai; 1979.