Modelling infrastructure interdependencies and cascading effects using temporal networks

Abstract

Lifelines are critical infrastructure systems characterized by a high level of interdependency that can lead to cascading failures after any disaster. Many approaches can be used to analyze infrastructural interdependencies, but they are usually not able to describe the sequence of events during emergencies. Therefore, interdependencies need to be modeled also taking into account the time effects. The methodology proposed in this paper is based on a modified version of the Input-output Inoperability Model and returns the probabilities of failure for each node of the system. Lifelines are modeled using graph theory, while perturbations, representing a natural or man-made disaster, are applied to the elements of the network following predetermined rules. The cascading effects among interdependent networks have been simulated using a spatial multilayer approach, while the use of an adjacency tensor allows to consider the temporal dimension and its effects. The method has been tested on a case study based on the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear disaster. Different configurations of the system have been analyzed and their probability of occurrence evaluated. Two models of the nuclear power plant have been developed to evaluate how different spatial scales and levels of detail affect the results.

Keywords

Interdependent infrastructure / Nuclear power plant / Cascading effects / Temporal networks / Input-output methods

Relevance to resilience

The research provides a method for modeling the resilience of complex network-like systems, such as nuclear power plants. The method accounts for both the time component and interdependencies. The work also allows evaluating the failure probability of different system configurations for a more accurate system resilience calculation.

The topic of the manuscript is relevant to resilience because:

1.It deals with the issues of infrastructure interdependencies during disaster. Reducing infrastructure interdependencies will improve resilience of infrastructures toward disasters;

2.The time dimension that is an important aspect of the recovery process after the disaster is taken into account by considering the variability of the interdependency during the disaster;

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Gian Paolo Cimellaro: Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Methodology, Funding acquisition. Alessandro Cardoni: Data curation, Validation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Andrei Reinhorn: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the Grant agreement no. ERC_IDEAL RESCUE_637842 of the project IDEAL RESCUE_Integrated Design and Control of Sustainable Communities during Emergencies.

References

[1] Poljan š ek K, Bono F, Gutiérrez E. Seismic risk assessment of interdependent critical infrastructure systems: the case of European gas and electricity networks. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2012; 41(1):61-79.

[2] Dueñas-Osorio L, Craig JI, Goodno BJ. Seismic response of critical interdependent networks. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2007; 36(2):285-306.

[3] Cimellaro GP, Solari D, Bruneau M.Physical infrastructure interdependency and regional resilience index after the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake in Japan. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 2014; 43(12):1763-84.

[4] Rinaldi SM, Peerenboom JP, Kelly TK. Identifying, understanding, and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Syst Mag 2001; 21(6):11-25.

[5] Zimmerman R. Social implications of infrastructure network interactions. J Urban Technol 2001; 8(3):97-119.

[6] Dudenhoeffer DD, Permann MR, Manic M. CIMS:a framework for infrastructure interdependency modeling and analysis. In: Proceedings of the 38th conference on winter simulation, winter simulation conference; 2006. p. 478-85.

[7] Lee EE II, Mitchell JE, Wallace WA. Restoration of services in interdependent infras- tructure systems: a network flows approach. IEEE Trans Syst, Man, Cybern, Part C (Appl Rev) 2007; 37(6):1303-17.

[8] Zhang P, Peeta S. A generalized modeling framework to analyze interdependencies among infrastructure systems. Transp Res Part B 2011; 45(3):553-79.

[9] Cimellaro GP. Urban resilience for emergency response and recovery. Fundamental Concepts and Applications; 2016.

[10] Ouyang M. Review on modeling and simulation of interdependent critical infras- tructure systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2014;121:43-60.

[11] Sharma N, Nocera F, Gardoni P. Classification and mathematical modeling of infras- tructure interdependencies. Sustain Resilient Infrastruct 2021; 6(1-2):4-25.

[12] Haggag M, Ezzeldin M, El-Dakhakhni W, Hassini E. Resilient cities critical infrastructure interdependence: a meta-research. Sustain Resilient Infrastruct 2022; 7(4):291-312.

[13] Wang F, Magoua JJ, Li N. Modeling cascading failure of interdependent critical infrastructure systems using HLA-based co-simulation. Autom Constr 2022;133:104008.

[14] Hossain NUI, El Amrani S, Jaradat R, Marufuzzaman M, Buchanan R, Rinaudo C, Hamilton M. Modeling and assessing interdependencies between critical infrastruc- tures using Bayesian network: a case study of inland waterway port and surrounding supply chain network. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2020;198:106898.

[15] Tang P, Xia Q, Wang Y. Addressing cascading effects of earthquakes in urban areas from network perspective to improve disaster mitigation. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 2019;35:101065.

[16] Bigger JE, Willingham MG, Krimgold F, Mili L.Consequences of critical infrastruc- ture interdependencies: lessons from the 2004 hurricane season in Florida. Int J Crit Infrastruct 2009; 5(3):199.

[17] Yang Y, Ng ST, Zhou S, Xu FJ, Li H. A physics-based framework for analyzing the resilience of interdependent civil infrastructure systems: a climatic extreme event case in Hong Kong. Sustain Cities Soc 2019;47:101485.

[18] Nan C, Sansavini G. A quantitative method for assessing resilience of interdependent infrastructures. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2017;157:35-53.

[19] Goldbeck N, Angeloudis P, Ochieng WY. Resilience assessment for interdependent urban infrastructure systems using dynamic network flow models. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 2019;188:62-79.

[20] Haimes YY, Horowitz BM, Lambert JH, Santos JR, Lian C, Crowther KG. Inoper- ability input-output model for interdependent infrastructure sectors. I: theory and methodology. J Infrastruct Syst 2005; 11(2):67-79.

[21] Avelino AF, Dall’erba S.Comparing the economic impact of natural disasters gen- erated by different input-output models: an application to the 2007 Chehalis river flood (wa). Risk Anal 2019; 39(1):85-104.

[22] Tamssaouet F, Nguyen KT, Medjaher K. System-level prognostics under mission pro- file effects using inoperability input-output model. IEEE Trans Syst, Man, Cybern 2019; 51(8):4659-69.

[23] Garcia-Hernandez JA, Brouwer R. A multiregional input-output optimization model to assess impacts of water supply disruptions under climate change on the Great Lakes economy. Econ Syst Res 2021; 33(4):509-35.

[24] Huang R, Malik A, Lenzen M, Jin Y, Wang Y, Faturay F, Zhu Z. Supply-chain im- pacts of Sichuan earthquake: a case study using disaster input-output analysis. Nat Hazards 2022; 110:2227-48.

[25] Setola R, Oliva G, Conte F. Time-varying input-output inoperability model. J Infras- truct Syst 2012; 19(1):47-57.

[26] Santos JR, Yu KDS, Pagsuyoin SAT, Tan RR. Time-varying disaster recovery model for interdependent economic systems using hybrid input-output and event tree anal- ysis. Eco Syst Res 2014; 26(1):60-80.

[27] Niknejad A, Petrovic D. A fuzzy dynamic inoperability input-output model for strategic risk management in global production networks. Int J Prod Econ 2016;179:44-58.

[28] Holme P, Saramäki J. Temporal networks. Phys Rep 2012; 519(3):97-125.

[29] Sun W, Bocchini P, Davison BD. Overview of interdependency models of critical infrastructure for resilience assessment. Nat Hazards Rev 2022; 23(1):04021058.

[30] Elkmann P. Emergency planning for nuclear power plants. CRC Press; 2017.

[31] Wall IB, Haugh JJ, Worlege DH. Recent applications of PSA for managing nuclear power plant safety. Prog Nucl Energy 2001; 39(3-4):367-425.

[32] He X, Tong J, Chen J. Maintenance risk management in Daya Bay nuclear power plant: PSA model, tools and applications. Prog Nucl Energy 2007; 49(1):103-12.

[33] U. NRC, Issuance Of Order To Modify Licenses With Regard To Requirements For Mitigation Strategies For Beyond-Design-Basis External Events, Washington, DC ( 2012).

[34] Gjorgiev B, Volkanovski A, Sansavini G. Improving nuclear power plant safety through independent water storage systems. Nucl Eng Des 2017;323:8-15.

[35] Valencia VV, Thal AE, Colombi JM, Sitzabee WE. Infrastructure decay modeling with the input-output inoperability model. ASCE-ASME J Risk Uncertain Eng Syst, Part B 2015; 1(1):011006.

[36] Leontief W.Input-output economics. Oxford University Press; 1986.

[37] Rojahn C, Sharpe RL.Earthquake damage evaluation data for California. Applied Technology Council; 1985.

[38] Eidinger J, Avila E, Ballantyne D, Cheng L, Der Kiureghian A, Maison B, O’Rourke T, Power M. Seismic fragility formulations for water systems. Reston, VA: American Lifelines Alliance; 2001.

[39] FEMA Hazus-MH 2.1 technical manual. Washington, DC: FEMA; 2013.

[40] Moriya K, Sato K.Fukushima Daiichi NPP accident: plant design and preliminary observations. Int. congress advances in nuclear power plants (ICAPP 2011) Nice, France; 2011.