Challenges to Methods for the Vulnerability Analysis of Critical Infrastructures



The required performance of critical infrastructures relies on intricate, often nonlinear interactions among a large number of interconnected and geographically distributed components of different types, including both technical and non-technical elements. Even their interaction with the regulatory, legal or institutional framework may eventually affect the overall vulnerability of infrastructure systems. Furthermore, the normal operation of these systems does not allow to detect ‘hidden’ interactions which might become crucial for the evolution of (cascading) failure events; the dynamic degradation of networks is sensitive to parameter variations and the system behavior cannot be described by linear equations.


Critical Infrastructure Vulnerability Analysis Electric Power Supply System Vulnerability Dynamic Degradation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bonabeau E (2002) Predicting the unpredictable. Harvard Bus Rev 80(3):5–11Google Scholar
  2. Borshchev A, Karpov Y, Kharitonov V (2002) Distributed simulation of hybrid systems with AnyLogic and HLA. Future Gener Comp Sy 18(6):829–839MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buldyrev SV, Parshani R, Paul G, Stanley HE, Havlin S (2010) Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature 464:1025–1028Google Scholar
  4. DeLaurentis D (2007) Role of humans in complexity of a system-of-systems. In: Duffy VG (ed) Digital human modeling, LNCS 4561. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 363–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. IRGC (2005) Risk governance: towards an integrative approach. White Paper No. 1, IRGC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  6. Kröger W (2008) Critical infrastructures at risk: a need for a new conceptual approach and extended analytical tools. Reliab Eng Syst Safe 93:1781–1787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kubik A (2002) Towards a formalization of emergence. Artif Life 9(1):41–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Wolf TD, Holvoet T (2005) Emergence versus self-organization: different concepts but promising when combined. In: Proceedings of the second international workshop on engineering self-organizing applications (July 2004), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 96–110Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanical and Process Engineering DepartmentETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Ecole Centrale Paris, Laboratoire Génie IndustrielChatenay-Malabry CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations