Structural-Parametric Approach to Assessing the Viability of Multi-Mode Objects under Conditions of Signifi cant Uncertainty

In recent decades, the concept of viability, proposed by S. Beer in the 1960s, has been actively developed. Viability differs from resilience in that it is a system’s ability to adapt to change and maintain dynamic equilibrium. This concept is widely used in various fields: social, economic, environmental, technological, organizational, and informational. Therefore, viability research is relevant for scientific and applied research, especially for complex multi-mode systems under conditions of significant uncertainty. Multi-mode systems designed and operated across numerous industries require a comprehensive (systems) approach to analysis and ensuring their reliability and effectiveness. Uncertainty, classified by degree, nature, and use of information, complicates traditional analysis methods. However, the lack of a unified methodological approach to viability assessment hinders a comprehensive study of the viability of these systems. In this publication, two key situations characterized by significant uncertainty are considered through an analysis of the functional and technological structures of multi-mode systems. In the first case, which can be described as situational-parametric uncertainty, information about operating modes, components, and their interactions is available, but data on the frequency of these modes’ application is lacking. In the second case, known as structural uncertainty, information about the modes, their intensity, and the frequency of element participation is available, but how they interact with each other is unclear. The structural-parametric analysis and synthesis performed in the context of the studied scenarios convincingly demonstrated the significant potential of applying a variety of mathematical tools for a comprehensive assessment of the survivability and viability of multi-mode systems.

1. Aldrich D., Meyer M. Social capital and community resilience, American Behavioral Scientist, 2015, no. 59 (2), pp. 254—269.

2. Bearse R. The return on investing in personal resilience. The CIP Report, Center for Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security, 2014, no. 12 (7), pp. 21—24.

3. Petersen L. Social resilience criteria for critical infrastructures during crises, IMPROVER D4.1, 2016, 115 p.

4. Ahert J. From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world, Landscape and Urban Planning, 2011, no. 100 (4), pp. 341—343.

5. Wang C., Blackmore J. Resilience concepts for water resource systems, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 2009, no. 135 (6), pp. 528—536.

6. Youn B., Hu C., Wang P. Resilience-driven system design of complex engineered systems, Journal of Mech Design, 2011, no. 133 (10), pp. 10108—10110.

7. Righi A., Saurin T., Wachs P. А systematic literature review of resilience engineering: Research areas and a research agenda proposal, Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2015, vol. 141, pp. 142—152.

8. Lee A., Vargo J. Seville E. Developing a tool to measure and compare organizations’ resilience, Natural Hazards Review, 2013, no. 14 (1), pp. 29—41.

9. Björck F. Cyber Resilience — Fundamentals for a Definition, New Contributions in Information Systems and Technologies. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer, Cham, 2015, vol. 353, pp. 311—316.

10. Moiseev N. N. Elements of the theory of optimal systems, Moscow, Nauka, 1975, 528 p. (in Russian).

11. Okhtilev M. Yu., Sokolov B. V., Yusupov R. M. Intelligent technologies for monitoring and controlling the structural dynamics of complex technical objects, Moscow, Nauka, 2006, 410 p. (in Russian).

12. Kalinin V. N., Kulakov А. Yu., Pavlov A. N., Potryasaev S. A., Sokolov В. V. Methods and algorithms for synthesizing technologies and programs for managing the reconfiguration of onboard systems of small-size spacecraft, Informatics and Automation, 2021, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 236—269 (in Russian).

13. Gorodetsky V. I., Skobelev P. O. Multi-agent technologies for industrial applications: reality and prospects, Trudy SPIIRAN, 2017, iss. 6 (55), pp. 11—45 (in Russian).

14. Pavlov А. N. Classification of monotone and non-mono-tone information systems based on the genome structure, Trudy SPIIRAN, 2012, iss. 2(21), pp. 238—248 (in Russian).

15. Yablonsky S. V. Introduction to discrete mathematics, Moscow, Nauka, 1986, 384 p. (in Russian).

16. Polenin V. I., Ryabinin I. A., Svirin S. K., Gladkova I. A. Application of the general logical-probabilistic method for the analysis of technical, military organizational-functional systems and armed confrontation, А. S. Mozhaev eds., St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg Regional Branch of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, 2011, 416 p. (in Russian).

17. Pavlov А. N. Methodological foundations for solving the problem of planning the structural-functional reconfiguration of complex objects, Journal of Instrument Engineering, 2012, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 7—12 (in Russian).

18. Ivanov D., Sokolov B., Pavlov А. Optimal distribution (re)planning in a centralized multi-stage supply network in the presence of the ripple effect, European Journal of Operational Research, 2014, vol. 237, iss. 2, pp. 758—770.

19. Pavlov A. N., Vorotyagin V. N., Slinko A. A. methodology for assessing the structural and functional survivability of onboard systems of small spacecraft in the event of unplanned flight situations, Information and Space, 2019, no. 2, pp. 139—147 (in Russian).

20. Afanasyev V. G., Mironov A. N., Zelentsov V. A. Design of reliable communication satellites, academician M. F. Reshetnev eds., Tomsk, MGP «RASKO», 1993, 221 p. (in Russian).

21. Pavlov A. N., Pavlov D. A., Umarov A. B., Gordeev А. V. Method of structural-parametric synthesis of multi-mode object configurations, Informatics and Automation, 2022, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 812—845 (in Russian).

22. Pavlov A., Pavlov D., Kulakov A., Zaharov V. Study of technology for the reliability and survivability modelling of onboard control system of small spacecraft operating in complex modes, Journal of Applied Engineering Science, 2024, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 612—620.

23. Pavlov A. N., Kolesnik D. Yu., Gordeev A. V., Vorotyagin V. N. Study of the potential capabilities of the motion control and navigation system of a small spacecraft under conditions of significant uncertainty in the implementation of orientation modes, Aerospace instrumentation, 2023, no. 8, pp. 23—37 (in Russian).

24. Pavlov A. N., Vorotyagin V. N., Pavlov D. A. Method of using fuzzy hypergraphs to assess the structural and technological survivability of elements of the attitude control system of unmanned spacecraft, Space Engineering and Technology, 2020, no. 3 (30), pp. 103—113 (in Russian).

25. Pavlov A. N., Pavlov D. A., Vorotyagin V. N. Study of the structural survivability of onboard systems of spacecraft based on centrality metrics of fuzzy graphs of digital twins, Aerospace instrumentation, 2024, no. 8, pp. 26—36 (in Russian).

26. Kalinin V. N. Theoretical foundations of systems research, St. Petersburg, VKA im. А. F. Mozhaisky, 2016, 291 p. (in Russian).

27. Newman M. Networks, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford. OX2 6DP, UK, Oxford University Press, 2018, 780 pp.

28. Bronevich A. G., Lepskiy А. E. Fuzzy models of data analysis and decision making: a tutorial, Nat. Issled. Un-t «Higher School of Economics», Moscow, Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2022, 264 p. (in Russian).

29. Gantmakher F. R. Matrix theory, Moscow, Fizmatlit, 2010, 560 p. (in Russian).