The conditional value of information of SHM: what if the manager is not the owner?

Only very recently our community has acknowledged that the benefit of Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) can be properly quantified using the concept of Value of Information (VoI). The VoI is the difference between the utilities of operating the structure with and without the monitoring system, usually referred to as preposterior utility and prior utility. In calculating the VoI, a commonly understood assumption is that all the decisions to concerning system installation and operation are taken by the same rational agent. In the real world, the individual who decides on buying a monitoring system (the owner) is often not the same individual (the manager) who will actually use it. Even if both agents are rational and exposed to the same background information, they may behave differently because of their different risk aversion. We propose a formulation to evaluate the VoI from the owner’s perspective, in the case where the manager differs from the owner with respect to their risk prioritisation. Moreover, we apply the results on a real-life case study concerning the Streicker Bridge, a pedestrian bridge on Princeton University campus, in USA. This framework aims to help the owner in quantifying the money saved by entrusting the evaluation of the state of the structure to the monitoring system, even if the manager’s behaviour toward risk is different from the owner’s own, and so are his or her management decisions. The results of the case study confirm the difference in the two ways to quantify the VoI of a monitoring system.

[1]  D. Lindley On a Measure of the Information Provided by an Experiment , 1956 .

[2]  D. Bernoulli Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk , 1954 .

[3]  Sebastian Thöns,et al.  Progress of the COST Action TU1402 on the Quantification of the Value of Structural Health Monitoring , 2017 .

[4]  Paul D. Wilcox,et al.  Enhanced detection through low-order stochastic modeling for guided-wave structural health monitoring , 2012 .

[5]  Chun-Gon Kim,et al.  Mechanical Strength Characteristics of Fiber Bragg Gratings Considering Fabrication Process and Reflectivity , 2007 .

[6]  Michael E. Ketzenberg,et al.  A framework for the value of information in inventory replenishment , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[7]  Daniele Inaudi,et al.  Development of method for in-service crack detection based on distributed fiber optic sensors , 2012 .

[8]  John Skilling,et al.  Data analysis : a Bayesian tutorial , 1996 .

[9]  K. Arrow,et al.  Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing , 1966 .

[10]  Sigrid Adriaenssens,et al.  Streicker Bridge: Initial evaluation of life-cycle cost benefits of various structural health monitoring approaches , 2010 .

[11]  P. Wakker Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity , 2010 .

[12]  Sebastian Thöns,et al.  On the Value of Monitoring Information for the Structural Integrity and Risk Management , 2018, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[13]  Matteo Pozzi,et al.  Assessing the value of information for long-term structural health monitoring , 2011, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[14]  Carlo Cappello,et al.  Impact of prior perception on bridge health diagnosis , 2015 .

[15]  H. Raiffa,et al.  Applied Statistical Decision Theory. , 1961 .

[16]  Morris H. Degroot,et al.  Changes in utility as information , 1994 .

[17]  John Quigley,et al.  Supplier quality improvement: The value of information under uncertainty , 2018, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  Eric B. Flynn,et al.  A Bayesian approach to optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring with application to active sensing , 2010 .

[19]  Sebastian Thöns,et al.  Assessing the value of structural health monitoring , 2013 .

[20]  Branko Glisic,et al.  Value of information: impact of monitoring on decision‐making , 2014 .

[21]  Daniele Zonta,et al.  An examination of the ARX as a residual generator for damage detection , 2009, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[22]  Branko Glisic,et al.  Streicker Bridge: a comparison between Bragg-grating long-gauge strain and temperature sensors and Brillouin scattering-based distributed strain and temperature sensors , 2011, Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choices, Values, and Frames , 2000 .

[24]  Robert E. Machol,et al.  Principles of Operations Research—12. Finale , 1975 .

[25]  Lurdes Y. T. Inoue,et al.  Decision Theory: Principles and Approaches , 2009 .

[26]  Carlo Cappello,et al.  Expected Utility Theory for Monitoring-Based Decision-Making , 2016, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[27]  L. Thévenaz,et al.  Simple distributed fiber sensor based on Brillouin gain spectrum analysis. , 1996, Optics letters.

[28]  Wenjian Wang,et al.  A framework for evaluating the impact of structural health monitoring on bridge management , 2010 .

[29]  J. Pratt RISK AVERSION IN THE SMALL AND IN THE LARGE11This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant NSF-G24035). Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted for any purpose of the United States Government. , 1964 .

[30]  Campbell R. McConnell,et al.  Economics: Principles, Problems, and Policies , 1960 .

[31]  Thomas M. Cover,et al.  Elements of Information Theory , 2005 .

[32]  Powell E. Robinson,et al.  Flow Coordination and Information Sharing in Supply Chains: Review, Implications, and Directions for Future Research , 2002, Decis. Sci..

[33]  Andrea Verzobio,et al.  Expected Utility Theory For Monitoring-Based Decision Support System , 2017 .

[34]  Eric B. Flynn,et al.  Optimal Placement of Piezoelectric Actuators and Sensors for Detecting Damage in Plate Structures , 2010 .

[35]  Matteo Pozzi,et al.  Negative value of information in systems ’ maintenance , .