On the methods of qualitative estimation of the safety state of structurally complex systems

Abstract. Aim. To show a method of overcoming the uncertainty in the requirements for the quality of data in non-standard situations and ways of formalizing the decision-making process aimed at ensuring safe operation of structurally complex systems. The paper proposes a method of axiomatic construction of integrated indicators that describe the properties of a system and its operational environment through the synthesis of the risk function. Methods. Methods of system analysis of the objective, Russman’s methods of the difficulty in achieving the objectives and the Shewhart charts theory. Results. The author proposed methods of qualitative estimation of two types of safety state, i.e. “better than” (for the purpose of defining a certain target level that characterizes the safety state that is to be ideally achieved) or “not worse than” (for the purpose of defining a certain maximum allowable level that characterizes the safety state, below which it is not allowed to go), that imply certain ranges of deviation from the specified target or, respectively, the minimal allowable levels, within which the safety state evaluated with an integrated index is deemed to be acceptable. Conclusions. It is shown that, in respect to problems of safety and risk assessment of structurally complex systems, one should not try to work with specific safety-related events only. All such events are characterized by a set of properties and contributing factors with associated characteristics. One should try to identify each property and each characteristic of such property, which would later allow defining proactive and reactive control actions in response to changes in such characteristics and properties. Having worked out a property of a situation or an event, we work out a property of a risk, and it is of no significance in which specific risk this property manifests itself. Combinations of risk properties can be extremely numerous, therefore it is very difficult to predict specific situations. That causes the requirement for a proactive decision support system that ensures high-quality managerial decisions short before a critical event.

structurally complex system, risk synthesis, safety, management, difficulty in achieving the objective, statistical reasoning

1. Bochkov A.V. Safonov V.S. Special analysis and assessment of risk indicators for rare events in regard to dangerous industrial facilities. Vesti Gazovoy Nauki 2020;1(42):84-95. (in Russ.)

2. Kolesnikov E.Yu. A topic of uncertainty in the publications of the journal “Issues of Risk analysis”. Issues of Risk Analysis 2019;16(3):78-93. (In Russ.) DOI:10.32686/1812- 5220-2019-16-3-78-93.

3. Huygens С. (1657). De calcul dans les jeux de hazard. Oeitvr. Comply t. 14. La Haye; 1920.

4. Bernoulli J. Ars conjectandi, opus posthumum. Accedit Tractatus de seriebus infinitis, et epistola gallicé scripta de ludo pilae reticularis. Basel: Thurneysen Brothers; 1713.

5. Boole G. An Investigation of the laws of thought on which are founded the mathematical theories of logic and probabilities. New York: Dover; 1957.

6. Laplace P.S. Le Systeme du Monde. Leningrad: Nauka; 1982.

7. Bochkov A.V. On the nature of risk in the safety management of structurally complex systems. Dependability 2019;4:53-64. DOI:10.21683/1729-2646-2019- 19-4-53-64.

8. Bochkov A.V. On the nature of risk in the safety management of structurally complex systems. Dependability 2020;1:57-67. DOI:10.21683/1729-2646-2019-19-4-53-64.

9. Bochkov A.V., Ponomarenko D.V. [Methodological foundations of monitoring and prediction of process safety in PAO Gazprom]. Gas Industry Magazine. 2017;3(749):20- 30. (in Russ.)

10. Ponomarenko D.V., Lesnykh V.V., Bochkov A.V. Modern approach to monitoring of industrial safety for hazardous production facilities. Issues of Risk Analysis 2018;15(1):6-17. (In Russ.)

11. Bochkov A. Ram M., Davim J., editors. Hazard and Risk Assessment and Mitigation for Objects of Critical Infrastructure. Diagnostic Techniques in Industrial Engineering. Management and Industrial Engineering. Springer, Cham; 2017. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-65497-3_3.

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

13. BochkovA., Lesnykh V., Lukyanchikov M. Problem of Creation of Integrated Index of Assessment of Production Safety Condition at Hazardous Production Facilities. In: Beer M., Zio E., editors. Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference. Research Publishing, Singapore; 2019; 1643-1650. DOI:10.3850/978-981-11- 2724-3 0077-cd.

14. Artobolevsky I.I. [On some methods of selection of integral criteria of quality in respect to optimal design of machines]. Proceedings of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR 1978;2:3-10. (in Russ.)

15. Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Moscow: Radio i sviaz; 1981.

16. Barsukov A.N., Bykov A.A., Lesnykh V.V. [Development of a system of indicators of emergency situations and crises]. [Industrial and environmental safety of gas industry facilities: Collection of studies]. Moscow: VNIIGAZ LLC;2008:76–86. (in Russ.)

17. Lukianchikov M.I. et al. [On the specificity of application of the risk-oriented approach as part of some types of inspection and oversight activities in Gazprom]. Gas Industry Magazine 2020;1(107):21-27. (in Russ.)

18. Saaty T.L. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process. Moscow: Izdatelstvo LKI; 2008.

19. Gayday A.A., Russman I.B. [Continuous supervision of the process of meeting a goal]. UBS 2004;7:106-113. (in Russ.)

20. Berkolayko M.Z., Dolgikh Yu.V., Ivanova K.G. [Difficulties in the sense of I.B. Russman and dependability estimation of control]. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Systems analysis and information technologies. 2008;2:7-9. (in Russ.)

21. Berkolayko M.Z., Dolgikh Yu.V. [Application of the difficulties apparatus to dependability estimation of organizational systems management]. Proceedings of the X International Research and Practice Conference System Analysis in the Design and Management. Saint Petersburg. 2006. 126-144. (in Russ.)

22. Cowden D. Statistical Methods in Quality Control. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo fiziko-matematicheskoy literatury; 1961.

23. Adler Yu., Shper V. [Practical guidelines for statistical process control]. Moscow: Alpina Publisher; 2019. (in Russ.)

24. GOST R 50779.42-99 (ISO 8258-91) Statistical methods. Shewhart control charts. Moscow: IPK Izdatelstvo standartov; 2002. (in Russ.)