Value of structural health information

Last updated

The value of structural health information is the expected utility gain of a built environment system by information provided by structural health monitoring (SHM). The quantification of the value of structural health information is based on decision analysis adapted to built environment engineering. The value of structural health information can be significant for the risk and integrity management of built environment systems.

Contents

Background

The value of structural health information takes basis in the framework of the decision analysis and the value of information analysis as introduced by Raiffa and Schlaifer [1] and adapted to civil engineering by Benjamin and Cornell. [2] Decision theory itself is based upon the expected utility hypothesis by Von Neumann and Morgenstern. [3] The concepts for the value of structural health information in built environment engineering were first formulated by Pozzi and Der Kiureghian [4] and Faber and Thöns. [5]

Formulation

The value of structural health information is quantified with a normative decision analysis. The value of structural health monitoring is calculated as the difference between the optimized expected utilities of performing and not performing structural health monitoring (SHM), and , respectively:

The expected utilities are calculated with a decision scenario involving (1) interrelated built environment system state, utility and consequence models, (2) structural health information type, precision and cost models and (2) structural health action type and implementation models. The value of structural health information quantification facilitates an optimization of structural health information system parameters and information dependent actions. [6] [7]

Application

The value of structural health information provides a quantitative decision basis for (1) implementing SHM or not, (2) the identification of the optimal SHM strategy and (3) for planning optimal structural health actions, such as e.g., repair and replacement. The value of structural health information presupposes relevance of SHM information for the built environment system performance. A significant value of structural health information has been found for the risk and integrity management of engineering structures. [6] [8] [7]

Related Research Articles

As a topic of economics, utility is used to model worth or value. Its usage has evolved significantly over time. The term was introduced initially as a measure of pleasure or happiness as part of the theory of utilitarianism by moral philosophers such as Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. The term has been adapted and reapplied within neoclassical economics, which dominates modern economic theory, as a utility function that represents a consumer's ordinal preferences over a choice set, but is not necessarily comparable across consumers or possessing a cardinal interpretation. This concept of utility is personal and based on choice rather than on pleasure received, and so requires fewer behavioral assumptions than the original concept.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Risk aversion</span> Economics theory

In economics and finance, risk aversion is the tendency of people to prefer outcomes with low uncertainty to those outcomes with high uncertainty, even if the average outcome of the latter is equal to or higher in monetary value than the more certain outcome. Risk aversion explains the inclination to agree to a situation with a more predictable, but possibly lower payoff, rather than another situation with a highly unpredictable, but possibly higher payoff. For example, a risk-averse investor might choose to put their money into a bank account with a low but guaranteed interest rate, rather than into a stock that may have high expected returns, but also involves a chance of losing value.

Marginalism is a theory of economics that attempts to explain the discrepancy in the value of goods and services by reference to their secondary, or marginal, utility. It states that the reason why the price of diamonds is higher than that of water, for example, owes to the greater additional satisfaction of the diamonds over the water. Thus, while the water has greater total utility, the diamond has greater marginal utility.

In mathematical optimization and decision theory, a loss function or cost function is a function that maps an event or values of one or more variables onto a real number intuitively representing some "cost" associated with the event. An optimization problem seeks to minimize a loss function. An objective function is either a loss function or its opposite, in which case it is to be maximized. The loss function could include terms from several levels of the hierarchy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Decision theory</span> Branch of applied probability theory

Decision theory is a branch of applied probability theory and analytic philosophy concerned with the theory of making decisions based on assigning probabilities to various factors and assigning numerical consequences to the outcome.

The expected utility hypothesis is a foundational assumption in mathematical economics concerning human preference when decision making under uncertainty. It postulates that a rational agent maximizes utility, as formulated in the mathematics of game theory, based on their risk aversion. Rational choice theory, a cornerstone of microeconomics, builds upon the expected utility of individuals to model aggregate social behaviour.

In decision theory, subjective expected utility is the attractiveness of an economic opportunity as perceived by a decision-maker in the presence of risk. Characterizing the behavior of decision-makers as using subjective expected utility was promoted and axiomatized by L. J. Savage in 1954 following previous work by Ramsey and von Neumann. The theory of subjective expected utility combines two subjective concepts: first, a personal utility function, and second a personal probability distribution.

Decision analysis (DA) is the discipline comprising the philosophy, methodology, and professional practice necessary to address important decisions in a formal manner. Decision analysis includes many procedures, methods, and tools for identifying, clearly representing, and formally assessing important aspects of a decision; for prescribing a recommended course of action by applying the maximum expected-utility axiom to a well-formed representation of the decision; and for translating the formal representation of a decision and its corresponding recommendation into insight for the decision maker, and other corporate and non-corporate stakeholders.

An influence diagram (ID) is a compact graphical and mathematical representation of a decision situation. It is a generalization of a Bayesian network, in which not only probabilistic inference problems but also decision making problems can be modeled and solved.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cardinal utility</span>

In economics, a cardinal utility function or scale is a utility index that preserves preference orderings uniquely up to positive affine transformations. Two utility indices are related by an affine transformation if for the value of one index u, occurring at any quantity of the goods bundle being evaluated, the corresponding value of the other index v satisfies a relationship of the form

Howard Raiffa was an American academic who was the Frank P. Ramsey Professor (Emeritus) of Managerial Economics, a joint chair held by the Business School and Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University. He was an influential Bayesian decision theorist and pioneer in the field of decision analysis, with works in statistical decision theory, game theory, behavioral decision theory, risk analysis, and negotiation analysis. He helped found and was the first director of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

Structural health monitoring (SHM) involves the observation and analysis of a system over time using periodically sampled response measurements to monitor changes to the material and geometric properties of engineering structures such as bridges and buildings.

The Allais paradox is a choice problem designed by Maurice Allais (1953) to show an inconsistency of actual observed choices with the predictions of expected utility theory. Rather than adhering to rationality, the Allais paradox proves that individuals rarely make rational decisions consistently when required to do so immediately. The independence axiom of expected utility theory, which requires that the preferences of an individual should not change when altering two lotteries by equal proportions, was proven to be violated by the paradox.

In decision theory, the expected value of sample information (EVSI) is the expected increase in utility that a decision-maker could obtain from gaining access to a sample of additional observations before making a decision. The additional information obtained from the sample may allow them to make a more informed, and thus better, decision, thus resulting in an increase in expected utility. EVSI attempts to estimate what this improvement would be before seeing actual sample data; hence, EVSI is a form of what is known as preposterior analysis. The use of EVSI in decision theory was popularized by Robert Schlaifer and Howard Raiffa in the 1960s.

An optimal decision is a decision that leads to at least as good a known or expected outcome as all other available decision options. It is an important concept in decision theory. In order to compare the different decision outcomes, one commonly assigns a utility value to each of them.

Value-driven design (VDD) is a systems engineering strategy based on microeconomics which enables multidisciplinary design optimization. Value-driven design is being developed by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, through a program committee of government, industry and academic representatives. In parallel, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has promulgated an identical strategy, calling it value-centric design, on the F6 Program. At this point, the terms value-driven design and value-centric design are interchangeable. The essence of these strategies is that design choices are made to maximize system value rather than to meet performance requirements.

In economics, marginal utility describes the change in utility of one unit of a good or service. Marginal utility can be positive, negative, or zero.

In decision theory, the von Neumann–Morgenstern (VNM) utility theorem shows that, under certain axioms of rational behavior, a decision-maker faced with risky (probabilistic) outcomes of different choices will behave as if they are maximizing the expected value of some function defined over the potential outcomes at some specified point in the future. This function is known as the von Neumann–Morgenstern utility function. The theorem is the basis for expected utility theory.

In decision theory, economics, and finance, a two-moment decision model is a model that describes or prescribes the process of making decisions in a context in which the decision-maker is faced with random variables whose realizations cannot be known in advance, and in which choices are made based on knowledge of two moments of those random variables. The two moments are almost always the mean—that is, the expected value, which is the first moment about zero—and the variance, which is the second moment about the mean.

In decision theory and quantitative policy analysis, the expected value of including uncertainty (EVIU) is the expected difference in the value of a decision based on a probabilistic analysis versus a decision based on an analysis that ignores uncertainty.

References

  1. Raiffa, Howard, 1924-2016. (2000). Applied statistical decision theory. Schlaifer, Robert. (Wiley classics library ed.). New York: Wiley. ISBN   047138349X. OCLC   43662059.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. Benjamin, J. R. Cornell, C. A. (1970). Probability, Statistics, and Decision for Civil Engineers. McGraw-Hill. OCLC   473420360.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  3. von Neumann, John; Morgenstern, Oskar (2007-12-31). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (60th Anniversary Commemorative ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. doi:10.1515/9781400829460. ISBN   9781400829460.
  4. Pozzi, Matteo; Der Kiureghian, Armen (2011-03-24). Kundu, Tribikram (ed.). "Assessing the value of information for long-term structural health monitoring". Health Monitoring of Structural and Biological Systems 2011. SPIE. 7984: 79842W. Bibcode:2011SPIE.7984E..2WP. doi:10.1117/12.881918. S2CID   3057973.
  5. Faber, M; Thöns, S (2013-09-18), "On the value of structural health monitoring", Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis, CRC Press, pp. 2535–2544, doi:10.1201/b15938-380, ISBN   9781138001237
  6. 1 2 "TU1402 Guidelines - Quantifying the Value of Structural Health Monitoring - COST Action TU 1402". www.cost-tu1402.eu. Retrieved 2019-10-21.
  7. 1 2 Thöns, Sebastian. "Background documentation of the Joint Committee of Structural Safety (JCSS): Quantifying the value of structural health information for decision support" (PDF).
  8. Sohn, H.; Farrar, C. R.; Hemez, F. M.; Shunk, D. D.; Stinemates, D. W.; Nadler, B. R.; Czarnecki, J. J. (2001). A Review of Structural Health Monitoring Literature: 1996–2001. Los Alamos: Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-13070-MS.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)