Building an Integrated Metric for Quantifying the Resilience of Interdependent Infrastructure Systems

  • Cen Nan
  • Giovanni SansaviniEmail author
  • Wolfgang Kröger
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8985)


Resilience is a dynamic multi-faceted term and complements other terms commonly used in risk analysis, e.g., reliability, availability, vulnerability, etc. The importance of fully understanding system resilience and identifying ways to enhance it, especially for infrastructure systems our daily life depends on, has been recognized not only by researchers, but also by public. During last decade, researchers have proposed different methods and frameworks to quantify/assess system resilience. However, they are tailored to specific disruptive hazards/events, or fail to properly include all the phases such as mitigation, adaptation and recovery. In this paper, an integrated metric for resilience quantification with capabilities of incorporating different performance measures is proposed, which can be used to quantify the performance of interdependent infrastructure systems in a more comprehensive way. The feasibility and applicability of the proposed metric will be tested using an electric power supply system as the exemplary system with the help of advanced modelling and simulation techniques. Furthermore, the discussion related to the effects of interdependencies among systems on their resilience capabilities is also included in this paper.


Interdependent Critical Infrastructure Resilience 


  1. 1.
    Kröger, W., Zio, E.: Vulnerable Systems. Springer, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eusgeld, I., Kröger, W., Sansavini, G., Schläpfer, M., Zio, E.: The role of network theory and object-oriented modeling within a framework for the vulnerability analysis of critical infrastructures. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 94(5), 954–963 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Madni, A.M., Jackson, S.: Towards a conceptual framework for resilience engineering. IEEE Syst. J. 3(2), 181–191 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fiksel, J.: Designing resilient, sustainable systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37(23), 5330–5339 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruneau, M., Chang, S.E., Eguchi, R.T., Lee, G.C., O’Rourke, T.D., Reinhorn, A.M., Shinozuka, M., Tierney, K., Wallace, W.A., von Winterfeldt, D.: A framework to quantitatively assess and enhance the seismic resilience of communities. Earthq. Spectra 19(4), 733–752 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Francis, R., Bekera, B.: A metric and frameworks for resilience analysis of engineered and infrastructure systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 121, 90–103 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alessandri, A., Filippini, R.: Evaluation of resilience of interconnected systems based on stability analysis. In: Hämmerli, B.M., Kalstad Svendsen, N., Lopez, J. (eds.) CRITIS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7722, pp. 180–190. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McDaniels, T., Chang, S., Cole, D., Mikawoz, J., Longstaff, H.: Fostering resilience to extreme events within infrastructure systems: Characterizing decision contexts for mitigation and adaptation. Global Environ. Change 18(2), 310–318 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferreira, C., Gama, J., Miranda, V., Botterud, A.: Probabilistic ramp detection and forecasting for wind power prediction. In: Billinton, R., Karki, R., Verma, A.K. (eds.) Reliability and Risk Evaluation of Wind Integrated Power Systems, pp. 29–44. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kamath, C.: Understanding wind ramp events through analysis of historical data.In: Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition, IEEE PES, pp. 1–6. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bilis, E.I., Kroger, W., Nan, C.: Performance of electric power systems under physical malicious attacks. IEEE Syst. J. 7(4), 854–865 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Filippini, R., Silva, A.: Resilience analysis of networked systems-of-systems based on structural and dynamic interdependencies, vol. 7, pp. 5899–5908 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nan, C., Sansavini, G.: Proposing a multi-layer modeling framework for complex infrastructure systems. In: Conference Proceedings ESREL, pp. 2051–2058 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schläpfer, M., Kessler, T., Kröger, W.: Reliability analysis of electric power systems using an object-oriented hybrid modeling approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1201.0552
  15. 15.
    Nan, C., Eusgeld, I., Kröger, W.: Analyzing vulnerabilities between scada system and suc due to interdependencies. Reliab. Eng. Syst.Saf. 113, 76–93 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bilis, E., Raschke, M., Kroeger, W.: Seismic response of the swiss transmission grid.In: Conference Proceedings ESREL, pp. 5–9 (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Raschke, M., Bilis, E., Krger, W.: Vulnerability of the swiss electric power transmission grid against natural hazards. In: Conference Proceedings ICASP11, pp. 1407–1414 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lachs, W.R.: Transmission-line overloads,: real-time control. In: Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings C, vol. 134, pp. 342–347. IET (1987)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Reliability and Risk Engineering GroupETH ZürichZürichSwitzerland
  2. 2.ETH Risk CenterETH ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations