Replacement policies for a complex system with unobservable components using dynamic Bayesian networks

References

• R. Kothamasu, S. H. Huang, and W. H. VerDuin, “System health monitoring and prognostics - a review of current paradigms and practices,” Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 28, 1012–1024 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Kalagnam and M. Henrion, “A comparison of decision analysis and expert rules for sequential analysis,” Proc. 4th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 271–281 (1988).
   Google Scholar
• D. Heckerman, J. S. Breese, and K. Rommelse, “Decision-theoretic troubleshooting,” Communications of the ACM, 38(3), 49–57 1995.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Skaanning, F. V. Jensen, and U. Kjærulff, “Printer troubleshooting using Bayesian networks,” Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, 367–379 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• F. V. Jensen, U. Kjærulff, B. Kristiansen, H. Langseth, C. Skaanning, J. Vomlel, and M. Vomlelováá, “The SACSO methodology for troubleshooting complex systems,” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 15(4), 321–333 (2001).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Langseth and F. V. Jensen, “Heuristics for two extensions of basic troubleshooting,” Proceedings of 7th Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 80–891 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• H. Langseth and F. V. Jensen, “Decision theoretic troubleshooting of coherent systems,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 80(1) 49–62 (2003).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Koca and T. Bilgiç, “Troubleshooting with dependent actions, conditional costs, and questions,” Technical Report FBE-IE-13/2004-18, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey (2004).
   Google Scholar
• P. Weber, G. Medina-Oliva, C. Simon, and B. Iung, “Overview on Bayesian networks applications for dependability, risk analysis and maintenance areas,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 25(4), 671–682, (June 2012).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Langseth, “Bayesian networks in reliability: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly,”, in Advances in Mathematical Modeling for Reliability, IOS Press, (Amsterdam, Netherland, 2008).
   Google Scholar
• J. G. Torres-Toledano and L. E. Sucar, “Bayesian networks for reliability analysis of complex systems,” Proceedings of 6th Ibero-American Conference on AI: Progress in Artificial Intelligence, 195–206 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• A. Bobbio, L. Portinale, M. Minichino, and E. Ciancamerla, “Improving the analysis of dependable systems by mapping fault trees into Bayesian networks,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 71, 249–260 (2001).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Portinale, D. C. Raiteri, and S. Montani, “Supporting reliability engineers in exploiting the power of Dynamic Bayesian Networks,” International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 51(2) 179–195 (2010).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Y. Dutuit, E. Chtelet, J. P. Signoret, and P. Thomas, “Dependability modelling and evaluation by using stochastic Petri nets: application to two test cases,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 55(2), 117–124 (1997).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Langseth and L. Portinale, “Bayesian networks in reliability,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 92, 92–108 (2006).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. L. Welch and T. V. Thelen, “Dynamic reliability analysis in an operational context: the Bayesian network perspective,” Proceedings of Dynamic Reliability: Future Directions, 277–307 (2000).
   Google Scholar
• P. Weber and L. Jouffe, “Reliability modeling with dynamic Bayesian networks,” Proceedings of 5th IFAC Symposium SAFEPROCESS'03, 57–62 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• A. Muller, P. Weber, and A. B. Salem, “Process model-based dynamic Bayesian networks for prognostic,” Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, (2004).
   Google Scholar
• J. Hu, L. Zhang, L. Ma, and W. Liang, “An integrated safety prognosis model for complex system based on dynamic Bayesian network and ant colony algorithm,” Expert Syst. Appl., 38(3), 1431–1446 (March 2011).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Weber, P. Munteanu, and L. Jouffe, “Dynamic Bayesian networks modeling the dependability of systems with degradations and exogenous constraints,” Proceedings of 11th IFAC Symposium on Informational Control Problems in Manufacturing (IN-COM'04), (2004).
   Google Scholar
• A. B. Salem, A. Muller, and P. Weber, “Dynamic Bayesian networks in system reliability analysis,” Proceedings of 6th IFAC Symposium on Fault Detection, Supervision and Safety of technical processes, 481–486 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• D. Özgür-Ünlüakin and T. Bilgiç, “Predictive maintenance using dynamic probabilistic networks,” Proceedings of the Third European Workshop on Probabilistic Graphical Models, 239–246 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• G. E. Monahan, “A survey of partially observable markov decision processes: theory, models, and algorithms,” Management Science, 28(1), 1–16 (1982).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Hauskrecht, “Value function approximations for partially observable markov decision processes,” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 13, 33–94 (2000).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. J. Sondik, The optimal control of partially observable Markov Processes, Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, (Stanford, California, 1971).
   Google Scholar
• R. D. Smallwood and E. J. Sondik, “The optimal control of partially observable Markov processes over a finite horizon,” Operations Research, 21, 1071–1088 (1973).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. Özgür-Ünlüakin and T. Bilgiç, “Replacement decisions for reliability centered maintenance,” Proceedings of the Tenth International FLINS Conference on Uncertainty Modeling in Knowledge Engineering and Decision Making, (Istanbul, Turkey, 2012).
   Google Scholar
• G. F. Cooper, “The computational complexity of probabilistic inference using Bayesian belief networks,” Artificial Intelligence, 42(23), 393–405 (1990).
   Google Scholar
• P. Dagum and M. Luby, “Approximating probabilistic inference in Bayesian belief networks is NP-hard,” Artificial Intelligence, 60(1), 141–153 (1993).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• http://staff.eng.bahcesehir.edu.tr/∼dozgur/software .
   Google Scholar
• K. P. Murphy, Dynamic Bayesian networks: representation, inference and learning, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, (Berkeley, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• J. Pearl, Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference, Morgan-Kaufman, (San Mateo, CA, USA, 1988).
   Google Scholar
• F. V. Jensen, Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs, Springer Verlag, (New York, USA, 2001).
   Google Scholar
• S. L. Lauritzen and D. Nilsson, “Representing and solving decision problems with limited information,” Management Science, 47(9), 1235–1251 (2001).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D. B. Keçeciogğlu, Reliability engineering handbook, DEStech Publications, (Pennsylvania, USA, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• K. P. Murphy, “The Bayes Net Toolbox for Matlab,” Computing Science and Statistics: Proceedings of the Interface, (2001).
   Google Scholar
• https://code.google.com/p/bnt/ .
   Google Scholar
• J. W. Tukey, The problem of multiple comparisons, Unpublished Notes, Princeton University, (1953).
   Google Scholar