Approximate reliability of multi‐state two‐terminal networks by stochastic analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliability is an important feature in the design and maintenance of a large‐scale system. Usually, for a two‐terminal network reliability is a measure for the connectivity between the source and sink nodes. Various approaches have been presented to evaluate system reliability; however, they become cumbersome or prohibitive due to the large computational complexity, especially when multiple states are considered for nodes. In this study, a stochastic approach is presented for estimating corresponding reliability. Randomly permuted sequences with fixed numbers of multiple values are generalized from non‐Bernoulli binary sequences to model the multi‐state property. State probabilities are represented by randomly permuted sequences to improve both computational efficiency and accuracy. Stochastic models are then constructed for arcs and nodes with different capacities. The proposed stochastic analysis is capable of predicting reliability at high accuracy and without a need for constructing the commonly‐used but complex multi‐state minimal cut vectors. Non‐exponential distributions and correlated signals are readily handled by the stochastic approach for a general network. Results obtained through the stochastic analysis are compared with exact values and those found by Monte Carlo simulation. The accuracy, efficiency and scalability of the stochastic approach are assessed by evaluating several case studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".