Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Risk Anal. 2019 Sep;39(9):1885-1898. doi: 10.1111/risa.13274. Epub 2019 Feb 14.
By providing objective measures, resilience metrics (RMs) help planners, designers, and decisionmakers to have a grasp of the resilience status of a system. Conceptual frameworks establish a sound basis for RM development. However, a significant challenge that has yet to be addressed is the assessment of the validity of RMs, whether they reflect all abilities of a resilient system, and whether or not they overrate/underrate these abilities. This article covers this gap by introducing a methodology that can show the validity of an RM against its conceptual framework. This methodology combines experimental design methods and statistical analysis techniques that provide an insight into the RM's quality. We also propose a new metric that can be used for general systems. The analysis of the proposed metric using the presented methodology shows that this metric is a better indicator of the system's abilities compared to the existing metrics.
通过提供客观的衡量标准，弹性指标（RMs）帮助规划者、设计者和决策者了解系统的弹性状况。概念框架为 RM 的开发奠定了坚实的基础。然而，一个尚未解决的重大挑战是评估 RMs 的有效性，即它们是否反映了弹性系统的所有能力，以及它们是否高估/低估了这些能力。本文通过引入一种可以根据概念框架评估 RM 有效性的方法来填补这一空白。该方法结合了实验设计方法和统计分析技术，深入了解 RM 的质量。我们还提出了一种可用于一般系统的新指标。使用提出的方法对所提出的指标进行分析表明，与现有指标相比，该指标是系统能力的更好指标。
