4.4 Article

Recent Advances in Modeling the Vulnerability of Transportation Networks

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000232

关键词

Disruption analysis; Literature review; Transportation network; Vulnerability

资金

  1. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)
  2. Hong Kong Polytechnic University Research Committee [G-u786]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51178116, 71001027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is well known that for major infrastructure networks such as electricity, gas, railway, road, and urban water networks, disruptions at one point have a knock-on effect throughout the network. There is an impressive amount of individual research projects examining the vulnerability of critical infrastructure network. However, there is little understanding of the totality of the contribution made by these projects and their interrelationships. This makes their review a difficult process for both new and established researchers in the field. To address this issue, a two-step literature review process is used to provide an overview of the vulnerability of the transportation network in terms of four main themesresearch objective, transportation mode, disruption scenario, and vulnerability indicatorinvolving the analysis of related articles from 2001 to 2013. Two limitations of existing research are identified: (1)the limited amount of studies relating to multilayer transportation network vulnerability analysis, and (2)the lack of evaluation methods to explore the relationship between structure vulnerability and dynamical functional vulnerability. In addition to indicating that more attention needs to be paid to these two aspects in the future, the analysis provides a new avenue for the discovery of knowledge, as well as an improved understanding of transportation network vulnerability. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据