Abstract
In this paper, a systematic review of non-probabilistic reliability metrics is conducted to assist the selection of appropriate reliability metrics to model the influence of epistemic uncertainty. Five frequently used non-probabilistic reliability metrics are critically reviewed, i.e., evidence-theory-based reliability metrics, interval-analysis-based reliability metrics, fuzzy-interval-analysis-based reliability metrics, possibility-theory-based reliability metrics (posbist reliability) and uncertainty-theory-based reliability metrics (belief reliability). It is pointed out that a qualified reliability metric that is able to consider the effect of epistemic uncertainty needs to (1) compensate the conservatism in the estimations of the component-level reliability metrics caused by epistemic uncertainty, and (2) satisfy the duality axiom, otherwise it might lead to paradoxical and confusing results in engineering applications. The five commonly used non-probabilistic reliability metrics are compared in terms of these two properties, and the comparison can serve as a basis for the selection of the appropriate reliability metrics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
