CIMSA 2008 – IEEE International Conference on
Computational Intelligence for Measurement Systems And Applications
Istanbul – Turkey , 14-16 July 2008
Reliability Assessment under Uncertainty Using Dempster-Shafer and Vague Set
Theories
Saeid Pashazadeh1, Mohsen Sharifi2
Department of Computer Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology
Narmak, Tehran, Iran
1
Phone: +98-411-3393790, Fax: +98-411-3303701, Email: pashazadeh@tabrizu.ac.ir
2
Phone: +98-21-73913307, Fax: +98-21-7893176, Email: msharifi@iust.ac.ir
Abstract – Analyzing reliability of a system in design stage requires
expert’s estimations and statistical data with various degrees of
epistemic uncertainty and doing aggregation in a coherent
framework. Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory is potentially valuable tool
for combination of evidence obtained from multiple different
sources. One approach for fuzzy reliability assessment is using
Vague set (VS) theory. DS theory has many similarities with VS
theory. Uncertain raw data about the component reliability of a
system can be combined using different combination methods of DS
theory and can be represented in the form of triangular fuzzy vague
number. Using the proper methods and equations, the fuzzy
reliability of the system can be computed with triangular vague
numbers of components reliability. Combining these two theories
eliminates the gap between the representation of combined
evidences and the way of representing the reliability of components
in the VS theory for reliability assessment. Our proposed method
eliminates this gap in very convenient form. Because of closed
relevance of these two theories we can represent the output of DS
combination in the form of vague triangular number in the VS
theory. With this method we eliminate the loss of meaningful
information in this conversion.
Keywords – Dempster-Shafer theory, Vague set theory, Fuzzy
system reliability, Uncertainty, Triangular fuzzy number.
I. INTRODUCTION
We are faced with different fundamental uncertainties for
reliability modeling and analysis of a system in design stage.
These uncertainties originate from uncertain or incomplete
component data, uncertainty about influencing factors, vague
estimation of failure functions, coarse-grained system models
and many other important factors [1]. Design changes in early
stages of system lifetime save the time and money in total
cost of project.
Two major type of uncertainty are aleatory and epistemic
uncertainty. Aleatory uncertainty also known as, stochastic
uncertainty, irreducible uncertainty and objective uncertainty
and results from the fact that system can behave in random
ways [2]. Aleatory uncertainty is defined "inherent variation
associated with the physical system or the environment under
consideration" [3]. These types of uncertainty may be
expressed as a random value of the characterization of a
system in the form of a known distribution. Epistemic
uncertainty also known as, subjective uncertainty, reducible
978-1-4244-2306-4/08/$25.00 ©2008 IEEE
uncertainty and state of knowledge uncertainty and results
from the lack of knowledge about a system and is a property
of the analysts performing the analysis [2]. Epistemic
uncertainty is defined "any lack of knowledge or information
in any phase or activity of the modeling process" [3]. This
Epistemic uncertainty is not an inherent property of the
system but is related to gain of information about the system
or environmental factors.
Aleatory uncertainty is best dealt with using the
frequentist approach with traditional probability theory. But
additivity assumption and principle of insufficient reason in
probability theory causes that frequentist approach is not
appropriate for epistemic uncertainty [2]. Probability theory
can be used for expressing the aleatory uncertainty with
presence of all required preconditions and assumptions. For
example in determining the reliability of a component, we
can collect statistical data about the failure and repair time of
the component during past working period, then representing
the reliability of a system with a probability distribution
function. Knowledge about the working history of the
component gives direction for estimating the functionality of
the component in future with specific accuracy. We can tell
that when the component will fail for next time and with the
amount of certainty for its occurrence. But if don’t have
history information about a component what we can tell
about its reliability. Fuzzy set theory is proper choice when
we are dealing with epistemic uncertainty. For example we
can collect the estimations of multiple independent experts
and their evidence about the reliability of an unknown
component then we can combine their fuzzy idea with proper
combination methods. Evidence from multiple sources
divided into four categories Consonant evidence, Consistent
evidence, Arbitrary evidence and Disjoint evidence [4].
Reliability modeling is the most famous discipline in
reliability engineering and is fully characterized in the
context of probability theory. Reliability block diagram and
fault tree analysis are two famous methods based on
probability theory [5],[6],[7]. But when we are dealing with
reliability assessment which has epistemic uncertainty
sources, fuzzy reliability analysis is the most proper choice.
Many works has been done on fuzzy reliability assessment
[8]. Some researchers are using fuzzy set and fuzzy numbers
for representing the reliability of a component. Some others
are using the VS theory and representing the reliability of a
component with triangular vague number [9]. Using
triangular vague interval is another method for fuzzy
reliability modeling [10]. In this paper we use VS theory and
representing the reliability of a component using triangular
vague number. We gather the expert’s data in crisp form and
then combine their using DS theory. Finally we represent
their evidence using belief and plausibility function in the
form of triangular vague number. These numbers can be used
for system reliability computation using VS theory and fuzzy
system reliability using operators of VS theory.
II. BASIC CONCEPTS
A. Dempster-Shafer Theory
Let U be the universe of discourse which represent set of
all possible values of a variable u, and these values are
mutually exclusive. We denote the power set of U as P(U)
which will have 2|U| different combined element.
Definition 1: Let m be a map from P(U) to [0,1], i.e., m:
P(U) → [0,1], satisfying
m(∅) = 0 (1)
∑A P(U) m(A) =1 (2)
where m(.) is called basic probability assignment (bpa)
function which is not a fuzzy measure. m(A) stands for the
specific probability assigned to proposition A so expresses the
proportion to which all available and relevant evidence
support the claim that a particular element of U, whose
characterization in terms of relevant attributes is deficient,
belongs to the set A [4],[11].
The value of the bpa for a given set A expresses the
proportion of all relevant and available evidence that supports
the claim that a particular element of U belongs to the set A
but to no particular subset of A [11].
Definition 2: Every set A∈P(U) for which m(A) > 0 is
usually called a focal element of m [11]. A focal element A is
an interval with a nonzero mass m(A) > 0. Because of the
uncertainty modeled it is not possible to give an exact
probability p(U∈A) for a value or interval A, yet upper and
lower bounds can be calculated. Lower and Upper bounds
can be represented with belief and plausibility functions [1].
Definition 3: Belief function is a map from P(U) to [0, 1],
i.e., Bel: P(U) → [0,1], satisfying
Bel(A) = ∑B|B⊆A m(B) (3)
The lower bound Belief for a set A is defined as the sum
of all the basic probability assignments of the proper subsets
(B) of the set of interest (A) (B⊆A). It is easy to obtain the
following two conclusions:
Bel (∅) = M(∅) =0 (4)
( )=∑ ⊆ ( )=1 (5)
Definition 4: Plausibility function is another map from
P(U) to [0,1], i.e., Pl: P(U) →[0,1], satisfying:
( )=1 (~ ) (6)
where ~A represents the complementary set of A regarding
U. Since Bel(~A) reflects the degree of belief of ~A, Pl(A)
represents the degree that one believe A is not false. In
general, the following conclusion holds true:
Pl(A) = ∑B|A B m(B) (7)
The upper bound, Plausibility, is the sum of all the basic
probability assignments of the sets (B) that intersect the set of
interest (A) (B∩A ≠ ∅). For all A∈P(U) holds:
( ) ( ) (8)
Bel(A) and Pl(A) is interpreted as bounds on the
probability p(x∈A). Belief function represents the maximal
value that all epistemic uncertainty believes p(x∈A).
Plausibility function represents the highest plausible value of
p(x∈A) [4].
Definition 5: In DS we assume that sources of evidence are
independent. Standard way of combining the evidence of two
independent source on some power set P(U) with two basic
assignments m1 and m2 is the Dempster's rule of combination.
for all A ≠ ∅, and m1,2(∅)=0.
( )=
∑ ( ). ( )
(9)
,
=∑ ( ). ( ) (10)
The Dempster-Shafer theory is a well-suited framework
for representing both epistemic and aleatory uncertainty [12].
We assume that different sources of evidence are
independent. DS combination rule has some disadvantages. It
will yield counterintuitive results in the face of significant
conflict in certain contexts. Only pieces of evidence are
regarded which are agreed by all sources. If at least one
source is faulty and/or there is no intersection between both
sources, DS rule is not reasonable or even applicable. Also
there is no possibility to assign weighting to importance of
expert estimations [13],[1]. For overcoming to this problem
different combination methods was developed. Choosing
proper combination method is one of the important works
that is based on many factors [4].
B. Vague Set Theory
Let U be a classical set of objects, called the universe of
discourse, we denote element of U generically by u.
Definition 6: Fuzzy set in universe of discourse U, is a
set of ordered pairs:
 A= u, µA (u)|u U (11) Membership
Value
μ A~ (u ) is called membership function or grade of
membership (also degree of confidence) of u in that maps 1
Against
U to the membership space M ∈ [0,1] [14] as: Region ( )
1
( ): 0,1 (12) 1 ( ) Hesitation
Region
Definition 7: Vague set in universe of discourse U is ( )
characterized by a true membership function, and a false ( )
membership function, as follows:
Support
Region
fA , t A : U → [0, 1] (13)
0 U
and
Fig. 1. A vague set.
fA (u) t A (u) 1 (14)
Definition 8: The vague set is convex if and only if for
all u1,u2 in U,
where is a lower bound on the grade of membership of
u derived from the evidence for u, and is a lower bound on
t A (λu (1 λ)u ) Min(t A (u ), t A (u )) (18)
the grade of membership of the negation of u derived from
the evidence against u. Fig. 1 shows a fuzzy vague set.
and
Suppose the universe of discourse is finite so, U = {u1, u2,
. . . , un}. A vague set of the universe of discourse U can be 1 fA (λu (1 λ)u ) Min(1 fA (u ), 1 fA (u ))
represented by (19)

= ∑ ( ), 1 ( )/ (15) Where λ∈[0,1].

Definition 9: The vague set is called normal vague set if
where ( ) = 1 so ( ) = 0.
∃ ui ∈ U, such that 1
Definition 10: A vague number is a vague subset in the
universe of discourse U that is both convex and normal.
0 t A (u ) µA (u ) 1 fA (u ) 1 (16)
Fig. 2 shows a triangular vague set . This can be
represented with a tuple in the form of below [9].
And 1 . Exact grade of membership of ui, ( )
is bounded is bounded to a subinterval ( ), 1 ( ) of
A = (a , b , c ); µ ; µ (20)
[0, 1] [9],[15]. When the universe of discourse U is infinite
set, the vague set is represented as
Membership
( ), ( ) Value
= , (17)

1 ( )

( )
0 U
Fig. 2. A Triangular vague number.
III. ARITHMETIC OPERATIONS ON TRIANGULAR ( )= ( )=1 ( )= 1 ( ) (26)
VAGUE NUMBERS
Reliability of a series system composed of independet
Fig. 3 shows two different triangular vague number and components is computed with relation below:
which is represented in the form of tuples below:
= ( , , ); ; RS =∏ R (27)
= ( , , ); ;
Some basic arithmetic operations on the fuzzy triangular Reliability of a parallel system composed of independet
vague numbers is as listed below [9]. components is computed with relation below:

A B= =1 ∏ (1 ) (28)
(a a ,b b ,c c ); Min(µ , µ ); Min(µ , µ ) (21)
Let we assume universe of discourse U as reliability that
B A= its maximum value is 1.
(a c ,b b ,c a ); Min(µ , µ ); Min(µ , µ ) (22) Consider a serial system consisting of n independent
component as shown in Fig. 4, where reliability of
A B= component Pi is represented by a vague set =
(a a ,b b ,c c ); Min(µ , µ ); Min(µ , µ ) (23) , , ; ; , where 0 1 and 1≤ i ≤ n.

B Input Output
=
A P1 P2 Pn
(a /c , b /b , c /a ); Min(µ , µ ); Min(µ , µ ) (24) Fig. 4. Serial system.

Fuzzy reliability of the serial system shown in Fig. 4 can

Membership be evaluated as follows [9]:
Value
= =
=1
1
1 ( ) (∏ ,∏ ,∏ ( ); );( ) (29)
=1 =1
1 ( ) Consider a parallel system consisting of n independent
component as shown in Fig. 5.

P1
( )
( ) Input Output
P2
0 U
Fig. 3. Two triangular vague number.

Pn
Fig. 5. Parallel system.
IV. ANALYZING FUZZY SYSTEM RELIABILITY
USING TRIANGULAR VAGUE SETS
Fuzzy reliability of the parallel system shown in Fig. 5
Let random variable be the lifetime (time to failure) of a can be evaluated as follows [9]:
component. The probability of component failute until time = 1 ∏ (1 )
is called unreliability of the component and represented by
relation below. = 1 (1 ),1 (1 ), (1 )

F(t) = P(X t) (25)

; ( ); ( ) (30)
=1 =1
Reliability of component is the probability that component Real system is composed of many serial and parallel
survives until some time . In other words, The component components. Reliability of the system can be computed using
don’t fails till time . minimal cut set method [5],[6],[7].
 V. COMBINING DS THEORY WITH VS THEORY

Both the DS theory and VS theory are such that they have
close correlation with each other [16]. Belief and plausibility
functions describe believe of one person on the proposition
A. These two functions are respectively interpreted as lower
and upper bounds of belief respectively. Difference between
Belief and plausibility represent the uncertainty of A. So the
difference represents the portion of belief that neither one can
believes nor disbelieve the proposition.
Belief function represents the maximal value that all
epistemic uncertainty believes the proposition A. It reflects
the degree that one believes A is true. Plausibility function
represents the highest plausible value of the proposition. We
can interpret it as the degree that one believes A is not false.
With this interpretation, the DS theory makes a similar form
in the fundamental definition of the measure of a proposition
to that in the definition of grade membership of an element in
a VS theory. If elements in a VS theory are concretized to be Fig. 6. Reliability of a series system.
subsets of a total set and the grade membership of the subsets
are redefined according to those of DS theory, the vague set Let assume that these three components have parallel
becomes DS theory. configuration in a system. The reliability of the system
We can eliminate the gap between expert’s data and the according to (30) is as listed below.
reliability of components in the fuzzy vague number form. = (0.7,0.8845,0.979); 0.45; 0.8
Experts represent the reliability of components in the form of
crisp values. Then we use appropriate combination rule of DS Fig. 7 shows the reliability of the components and the
theory. The reliability of component can be represented with reliability of a system that is composed of these components
belief and plausibility form. We can represent the values of in parallel configuration.
belief and plausibility functions in the form of triangular
vague number. After that we can use appropriate operators of
triangular vague number and minimal cut set method for
computing the reliability of the total system.

VI. SAMPLE CASE STUDY

Assume that we have a system composed of three

components. We composed the estimates and ideas of experts
that were represented in mass assignment form by DS
combination rules. Then we represented the results in the
form of fuzzy vague numbers. Now assume that their
reliabilities are represented in the form of fuzzy vague sets as
listed below.
= (0.2,0.3,0.4); 0.54; 0.8
= (0.25,0.45,0.65); 0.6; 0.9
= (0.5,0.7,0.9); 0.45; 0.85
Let assume that these three components have series Fig. 7. Reliability of parallel system.
configuration in a system. The reliability of the system
according to (29) is computed as below. Fig. 8 shows the configuration of a system that is
composed of two parallel components and that are
= (0.025,0.0945,0.234); 0.45; 0.8 series with component .

Fig. 6 shows the reliability of the components and the

reliability of a system that is composed of these components
in series configuration.

P2
Output
Input
P1
P3
Fig. 8. Series and parallel system.
Reliability of this system can be computed using (31).
R=R ⊗ 1 1 R 1 R
Fig. 9 shows the reliability of this series-parallel system.
Reliability of this system is computed as below.
= (0.125,0.2505,0.386); 0.45; 0.8
Fig. 9. Reliability of series and parallel system.
VII. CONCLUSION
Analyzing fuzzy system reliability using VS theory is one of
the common methods of reliability assessment of a system
with uncertainty conditions. DS theory is a well-suited
framework for reliability analysis in early design stages. Data
uncertainty can be preserved and propagated during the
whole analytical process of reliability assessment. Choosing
Proper combination method causes that we have more
accurate representation of uncertainty. Combination of
evidence from different independent sources gives common
believed evidence. The way of representing the combined
evidence in such fuzzy numbers form which can match with
the reliability representation in the assessment process, is
important phase which has influence on the accuracy of fuzzy
reliability assessment. Our proposed method have eliminates
this gap in very convenient form. We represented the output
of DS combination in the form of vague fuzzy number for
computing reliability of the systems. Because of closed
relevance of these two theories we can represent the output of
DS combination in the form of vague triangular number in
the VS theory such that we don’t have any loss of meaningful
information in this conversion.
REFERENCES
1] P. Limbourg and D. Germann, "Reliability Assessment and Optimization
(31) under Uncertainty in the Dempster-Shafer Framework", in 27th
ESReDA SEMINAR, Glasgow, UK, 2004.
[2] J. C. Helton, “Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis in the Presense of
Stochastic and Subjective Uncertainty”, journal of statistical
computation and simulation vol 57, 1997, pp.3-76.
[3] W. L. Oberkampf, J. C. Helton, C. A. Joslyn, et al, “Challenge Problems:
Uncertainty in System Response Given Uncertain Parameters”,
Reliability Engineering & System Safety,2004, vol. 85(1-3), pp.11-19.
[4] K. Sentz, “Combination of Evidence in Dempster-Shafer Theory”, SAND
2002-0835 Unlimited Release Printed April 2002.
[5] M. Rausand, A. Hoyland, "System Reliability Theory: Models, Statistical
Methods, and Applications", 2nd Edition, John Willey & Sons Inc,
2004.
[6] A. Villemeur, “Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety
Assessment, Volume 1, Methods and Techniques”, John Willey & Sons
Inc, 1991.
[7] K. S. Trivedi, "Probability and Statistics with Reliability, Queuing and
Computer Science Applications", John Willey & Sons Inc, 2002, pp.
124-129.
[8] X. R. Lei, Z. Ren, W.Y. Huang, B.Y. Chen, “Fuzzy reliability
analysis of distribution systems accounting for parameters uncertainty”,
Proceedings of International Conference on Machine Learning and
Cybernetics, 2005, Publication Date: 18-21 Aug. 2005, Vol.7, pp:
4017- 4022.
[9] S. M. Chen, "Analyzing fuzzy system reliability using vague set theory,"
International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, vol. 1, no. 1,
pp. 82-88, March 2003.
[10] A. Kumar,S. P. Yadav,S. Kumar , “Generalization of Fuzzy Sets and its
Use for Analyzing the Fuzzy System Reliability”, IEEE International
Conference on Industrial Technology, ICIT 2006, 15-17 Dec. 2006, pp:
2675-2680.
[11] G. J. Klir and B. Yuan, “Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic Theory and
Applications”, 2005, Prentice-Hall Inc.
[12] G. Shafer, “A Mathematical Theory of Evidence”, Princeton, NJ,
Princeton University Press, 1976.
[13] A. L. Zadeh, “Review of Books: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence”,
The AI Magazine 5(3): 81-83.
[14] H. J. Zimmermann, “Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications”, Third Ed,
Kluwer Academic Publisher,1996.
[15] A. Lu and W. Ng, "Vague Sets or Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets for Handling
Vague Data: Which One Is Better?", Lecture Notes in Computer
Science Vol. 3716. Springer-Verlag GmbH (2005) 401-416.
[16] J. Li, Q. Yang and B. Yang, “Dempster-Shafer theory is a special case
of vague sets theory”, Proceedings of International Conference on
Information Acquisition, 21-25 June 2004, pp: 50 – 53.