Analysis of two-terminal network reliability based on efficient data structure

  • S. ChatterjeeEmail author
  • Venkata Ramana
  • Gajendra K. Vishwakarma
Original Article


The present work is depend upon a different data structure to perform the network reliability estimation efficiently. Zero suppressed binary decision diagram (ZBDD) is an well ordered and effective method of representing not only the boolean functions but also the sets of combinations than the conventional binary decision diagrams (BDD). This paper proposes new algorithm to manipulate the ZBDDs the variant of BDD on some benchmark networks. The 2-terminal network reliability problem has been studied extensively and effective results have been obtained.


2-terminal network reliability Path sets Cut sets Binary decision diagrams (BDDs) Ordered binary decision diagrams (OBDDs) Zero suppressed binary decision diagrams (ZBDDs) 



  1. Akers SB (1978) Binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans Comput 1(6):509–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball MO (1986) Computational complexity of network reliability analysis: an overview. IEEE Trans Reliab 35(3):230–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball MO, Colbourn CJ, Provan JS (1995) Network reliability, network models. Handbook of operations research. Elsevier, North Holland, pp 673–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryant RE (1986) Graph based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Trans Comput C 35(8):677–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryant RE (1992) Symbolic boolean manipulation with ordered binary decision diagrams. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 24(3):293–318MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Colbourn CJ (1987) The combinatorics of network reliability. Oxford University Press Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Hardy G, Lucet C, Limnios N (2007) K-terminal network reliability measures with binary decision diagrams. IEEE Trans Reliab 56(3):506–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hariri S, Raghavendra S (1987) Syrel: a symbolic reliability algorithm based on path and cutest methods. IEEE Trans Comput 10:1224–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kobayashi K, Yamamoto H (1999) A new algorithm in enumerating all minimal paths in a sparse network. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 65(1):11–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kuo SY, Lu SK, Yeh FM (1999) Determining terminal-pair reliability based on edge expansion diagrams using OBDD. IEEE Trans Reliab 48(3):234–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuo SY, Yeh FM, Lin HY (2007) Efficient and exact reliability evaluation for networks with imperfect vertices. IEEE Trans Reliab 56(2):288–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lee CY (1959) Representation of switching circuits by binary-decision programs. Bell Syst Tech J 38(4):985–999MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lu JM, Innal F, Wu XY, Liu Y, Lun dteigen MA (2016) Two-terminal reliability analysis for multi-phase communication networks. Eksploatacja I Niezawodnosc 18(3):418–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Minato SI (1993) Zero-suppressed BDDs for set manipulation in combinatorial problems. In: 30th ACM/IEEE design automation conference, pp 272–277Google Scholar
  15. Minato SI (2001) Zero-suppressed BDDs and their applications. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf 3(2):156–170zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Misra R, Chaturvedi SK (2009) A cutset based unified framework to evaluate network reliability measures. IEEE Trans Reliab 58(4):658–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nguyen D, Vo B, Vu DL (2016) A parallel strategy for the logical-probabilistic calculus-based method to calculate two-terminal reliability. Qual Reliab Eng Int 32(7):2313–2327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pino W, Gomes T, Kooij R (2015) A comparison between two all-terminal reliability algorithms. J Adv Comput Netw 3(4):284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rauzy A (1993) New algorithms for fault tree analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 40(3):203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rauzy A (2003) A New methodology to handle boolean models with loops. IEEE Trans Reliab 52(1):96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Satyanarayana A, Chang MK (1983) Network reliability and the factoring theorem. Networks 13(1):107–120MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shen Y (1995) A new simple algorithm for enumerating all minimal paths and cuts of a graph. Microelectron Reliab 35(6):973–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Singh H, Vaithilingam S, Anne K (1996) Terminal reliability using binary decision diagrams. Microelectron Reliab 36(3):363–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Soh S, Rai S (1991) CAREL: computer aided reliability evaluator for distributed computing networks. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 2(2):199–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Soh S, Rai S (1993) Experimental results on preprocessing of path/cut terms in sum of disjoint product techniques. IEEE Trans Reliab 42(1):24–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Somenzi F (2012) CUDD: CU decision diagram package: Release 2.5.0.
  27. Thayse A, Davio M, Deschamps JP (1978) Optimization of multiple-valued decision diagrams. ISMVL-8, pp 171–177Google Scholar
  28. Theologou O, Carlier J (1991) Factoring and reductions for networks with imperfect vertices. IEEE Trans Reliab 40(2):210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Veeraraghavan M, Trivedi KS (1991) An improved algorithm for symbolic reliability analysis. IEEE Trans Reliab 40(3):347–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Venkata Ramana B, Chatterjee S, Vishwakarma GK (2017) Estimation of network reliability using optimal ROBDD approach. ARS Combinatoria (Accepted)Google Scholar
  31. Yeh FM, Lu SK, Kuo SY (2002) OBDD-based evaluation of k-terminal network reliability. IEEE Trans Reliab 51(4):443–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zang X, Sun N, Trivedi KS (1999) A BDD-based algorithm for reliability analysis of phased mission systems. IEEE Trans Reliab 48(1):50–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang Z, Shao F (2018) A diameter-constrained approximation algorithm of multistate two-terminal reliability. IEEE Trans Reliab 67(3):1249–1260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhu P, Guo Y, Lombardi F, Han J (2017) Approximate reliability of multi-state two-terminal networks by stochastic analysis. IET Netw 6(5):116–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied MathematicsIndian institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines)DhanbadIndia

Personalised recommendations