Method and device for evaluating reliability of logistics system

Abstract

The invention discloses a logistics system reliability evaluation method and device, and relates to the technical field of computers. A specific embodiment of the method comprises the following steps: determining logistics subsystems corresponding to a business scene in a logistics system and an association relationship among the logistics subsystems; determining each influence factor of each logistics subsystem, and determining a fault influence coefficient of the logistics subsystem according to each influence factor; determining the importance degree parameter of each logistics subsystem according to the association relationship among the logistics subsystems; and determining the reliability of each logistics subsystem according to the fault influence coefficient and the importance degree parameter of each logistics subsystem and the preset failure probability of the logistics system. According to the embodiment, the reliability of the logistics system can be quantitatively evaluated, the accuracy and rationality of evaluation are improved, and unstable factors in the logistics system can be determined in the system architecture design stage, so that the system architecture design is adjusted, the fault occurrence probability is reduced, and the robustness of the system is improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of computer technology, and in particular to a method and apparatus for reliability assessment of a logistics system. Background Technology

[0002] In the early stages of logistics system architecture design, the failure probability of each subsystem in the logistics system can be assessed in advance to conduct a preliminary analysis of the system architecture's reliability.

[0003] In related technologies, based on business experience, the equal allocation method is used to decompose the logistics system architecture, which is assumed to be in parallel, and distribute the failure probability of the overall system equally to each subsystem. However, the equal allocation method is difficult to reasonably assess the reliability of complex logistics systems, has low accuracy, and thus leads to poor system stability. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, embodiments of the present invention provide a method and apparatus for reliability assessment of a logistics system, which can quantitatively assess the reliability of the logistics system, improve the accuracy and rationality of the assessment, identify unstable factors in the logistics system during the system architecture design stage, adjust the system architecture design, reduce the probability of failure, and improve the robustness of the system.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, according to one aspect of the present invention, a method for reliability assessment of a logistics system is provided, comprising:

[0006] Identify the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenarios, as well as the relationships between these subsystems.

[0007] Identify the various influencing factors for each logistics subsystem, and determine the failure impact coefficient of that logistics subsystem based on these factors.

[0008] The importance parameters of each logistics subsystem are determined based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems.

[0009] The reliability of each logistics subsystem is determined based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

[0010] Optionally, the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem is determined based on various influencing factors, including:

[0011] Obtain the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor for each logistics subsystem;

[0012] Based on the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor, determine the degree of failure impact of each logistics subsystem;

[0013] The failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact degree value of each logistics subsystem.

[0014] Optionally, determine the failure impact value for each logistics subsystem, including:

[0015] Based on the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor in each logistics subsystem, determine the failure impact value of each influencing factor;

[0016] The failure impact level of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact level values ​​of each influencing factor.

[0017] Optionally, the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact degree value of each logistics subsystem, including:

[0018] The total failure impact value is determined based on the failure impact values ​​of each logistics subsystem.

[0019] The failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact value of each subsystem and the total failure impact value.

[0020] Optionally, the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem are determined based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems, including:

[0021] The number of interactions for each logistics subsystem is determined based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems.

[0022] The importance parameter of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the number of interactions between the various logistics subsystems.

[0023] Optionally, the number of interactions in each logistics subsystem includes the number of interfaces in each logistics subsystem and the number of sub-modules in each logistics subsystem.

[0024] Optionally, the reliability of each logistics subsystem is determined, including:

[0025] The reliability of the logistics system is determined based on the preset failure probability of the logistics system;

[0026] The reliability value of each logistics subsystem in the logistics system is determined based on the failure impact coefficient and importance parameter of each logistics subsystem.

[0027] The reliability of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the reliability of the logistics system and the reliability level value.

[0028] According to another aspect of the present invention, an apparatus for reliability assessment of a logistics system is provided, comprising:

[0029] The first determination module determines the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenario, as well as the relationships between the various logistics subsystems.

[0030] The second determination module determines the various influencing factors of each logistics subsystem, and determines the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem based on each influencing factor.

[0031] The third module determines the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them.

[0032] The fourth determination module determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

[0033] According to another aspect of the present invention, an electronic device is provided, comprising:

[0034] One or more processors;

[0035] Storage device for storing one or more programs.

[0036] When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the method for reliability assessment of logistics systems provided by the present invention.

[0037] According to another aspect of the present invention, a computer-readable medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided by the present invention.

[0038] One embodiment of the above invention has the following advantages or beneficial effects: The method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided by this invention first determines the corresponding logistics subsystems and the relationships between them based on the business scenario. Then, it determines the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on its various influencing factors. It then determines the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them. Finally, it determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on the failure impact coefficient and importance parameter, combined with the preset failure probability of the logistics system. This allows for the redesign of the logistics system architecture based on the reliability of each logistics subsystem. This method quantitatively determines the failure impact coefficient through various influencing factors of each logistics subsystem, quantitatively determines the importance impact parameter based on the relationships between them, and then quantitatively determines the reliability of the logistics subsystem. This method improves the accuracy and rationality of logistics system reliability assessment. The reliability of each logistics subsystem obtained by this method can identify and resolve unstable factors in the logistics system during the system architecture design phase, thereby enabling early redesign at the architecture level to avoid probabilistic failure events and improve the robustness and reliability of the logistics system.

[0039] The further effects of the aforementioned unconventional alternative methods will be explained below in conjunction with specific implementation methods. Attached Figure Description

[0040] The accompanying drawings are provided to better understand the invention and are not intended to unduly limit the scope of the invention. Wherein:

[0041] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the main flow of a method for reliability assessment of a logistics system according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0042] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the main flow of another method for reliability assessment of a logistics system according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0043] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the main process of another method for reliability assessment of a logistics system according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0044] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the main modules of a logistics system reliability assessment apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0045] Figure 5 This is an exemplary system architecture diagram in which embodiments of the present invention can be applied;

[0046] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a computer system suitable for implementing terminal devices or servers of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0047] The following description, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, illustrates exemplary embodiments of the present invention, including various details to aid understanding. These details should be considered merely exemplary. Therefore, those skilled in the art will recognize that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of the invention. Similarly, for clarity and brevity, descriptions of well-known functions and structures are omitted in the following description.

[0048] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the main flow of a method for reliability assessment of a logistics system according to an embodiment of the present invention, as shown below. Figure 1 As shown, the method for reliability assessment of this logistics system includes the following steps:

[0049] Step S101: Determine the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenario and the relationships between these subsystems;

[0050] Step S102: Determine the various influencing factors for each logistics subsystem, and determine the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem based on each influencing factor;

[0051] Step S103: Determine the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them;

[0052] Step S104: Determine the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

[0053] In this embodiment of the invention, the method for assessing the reliability of a logistics system can evaluate the reliability of a complex logistics system during the logistics system architecture design phase, and adjust the logistics system based on the assessment results to avoid probabilistic events that could cause the logistics system to fail.

[0054] In this embodiment of the invention, when assessing the reliability of a logistics system, the corresponding logistics subsystems and their interrelationships are first determined based on the business scenario. A logistics subsystem can be an independent component within the logistics system, and it can be a software system or a hardware system. The business scenario indicates the business process, and the interrelationships, i.e., the interaction relationships, between the various logistics subsystems can be determined based on the business process.

[0055] For example, taking the on-site installation process of an installation engineer in a logistics system as an example, in this business scenario, the AI ​​(Artificial Intelligence) intelligent appointment module first communicates with the customer to make an intelligent appointment, and at the same time triggers the SMS appointment module to send a relevant on-site installation appointment message to the customer. The engineer arrives on time according to the appointment time, and uses the map navigation function provided by the engineer's APP (application) to guide the engineer to the customer's location. When the engineer arrives at the customer's address, GIS is used to collect data to confirm whether the engineer has actually arrived and to calculate whether the engineer has actually provided on-site service. After the engineer completes the work, the engineer uses the App to take photos and upload the installation results, and at the same time, the engineer submits the final completion feedback information to the backend service. According to the above process, the logistics subsystems involved in this business scenario include an on-site appointment module subsystem, an on-site appointment check-in service subsystem, and a completion feedback module subsystem. Among them, the on-site appointment module subsystem includes an AI appointment module and an SMS appointment module, and the on-site performance check-in module subsystem includes a route navigation module and a GIS (Geographic Information System) module. The system (Geographic Information System) positioning module and the completion feedback module subsystem include the App photo upload module and the completion feedback inspection module. The reliability of each subsystem will affect the reliability of the entire logistics system.

[0056] In this embodiment of the invention, after determining each logistics subsystem corresponding to the business scenario, each influencing factor of the logistics subsystem is determined. The influencing factors of each logistics subsystem are the fault factors that may affect the reliability of the logistics subsystem. These factors can be obtained based on the historical fault data of the logistics subsystem or based on business experience. When determining the influencing factors of the logistics subsystem based on its historical fault data, the historical fault data of the logistics subsystem is obtained. The historical fault data includes fault identifiers and the number of occurrences corresponding to the fault identifiers. Fault factors corresponding to fault identifiers with a frequency exceeding a preset threshold can be determined as the influencing factors of the logistics subsystem. Therefore, the fault influence coefficient of the logistics subsystem is determined based on each influencing factor.

[0057] In embodiments of the present invention, such as Figure 2 As shown, the failure impact coefficient of this logistics subsystem is determined based on various influencing factors, including:

[0058] Step S201: Obtain the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor for each logistics subsystem;

[0059] Step S202: Determine the failure impact value of each logistics subsystem based on the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor;

[0060] Step S203: Determine the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the failure impact degree value of each logistics subsystem.

[0061] In this embodiment of the invention, determining the fault impact degree value of each logistics subsystem includes: determining the fault impact degree value of each influencing factor based on the severity value and occurrence value of each influencing factor of each logistics subsystem; and determining the fault impact degree value of the logistics subsystem based on the fault impact degree values ​​of each influencing factor.

[0062] In this embodiment of the invention, determining the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the fault impact degree value of each logistics subsystem includes: determining the total fault impact degree value based on the fault impact degree value of each logistics subsystem; and determining the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the fault impact degree value of each logistics subsystem and the total fault impact degree value.

[0063] In this embodiment of the invention, after determining the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem based on various influencing factors, the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor for each logistics subsystem are first obtained. These values ​​can be obtained according to pre-set parameters or determined based on historical failure data for each influencing factor. For example, the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor can be determined based on the frequency of occurrence of each factor and its impact on the logistics subsystem. Then, the product of the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor for the logistics subsystem is determined, and this product is used as the failure impact value of that factor, i.e., the risk priority number of the failure mode corresponding to that factor.

[0064] After determining the failure impact value of each influencing factor, the failure impact value of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact values ​​of each influencing factor. Specifically, the failure impact value of the logistics subsystem can be the product of the sum of the failure impact values ​​of each influencing factor of the logistics subsystem and the preset weight coefficient. The preset weight coefficient can be determined based on the number of logistics subsystems in the logistics system, such as the number of logistics subsystems.

[0065] After determining the fault impact level of each logistics subsystem, a fault impact coefficient for each subsystem is determined based on these values. Specifically, the sum of the fault impact levels of all logistics subsystems can be used as the total fault impact level. Then, the ratio of the fault impact level of each subsystem to the total fault impact level is used as the fault impact coefficient for that subsystem.

[0066] For example, the j-th influencing factor f of the i-th logistics subsystem ij Severity value: Sij and the degree of occurrence value O ij The risk priority number (rpn) of this impact factor ij =S ij O ij The set of risk priority numbers for each influencing factor of the logistics subsystem can be used as an evaluation coefficient of the impact of the logistics subsystem on the overall logistics system. For a logistics subsystem, the higher the risk priority number, the greater the impact of the failure mode on the logistics system, the greater the required reliability level, and the lower the corresponding failure probability. Therefore, the failure impact value of the logistics subsystem can be calculated based on the failure impact value of each influencing factor, i.e., each risk priority number, which can be obtained according to equation (1).

[0067]

[0068] Among them, v i Let N be the failure impact value of the i-th logistics subsystem, and N be the number of logistics subsystems in the logistics system. Where n is the number of influencing factors j of the i-th logistics subsystem, rpn i rpn is the sum of the failure impact values ​​of each influencing factor in the i-th logistics subsystem. ij The fault impact value of the j-th influencing factor in the i-th logistics subsystem is the risk priority number.

[0069] Based on the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem, the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem can be obtained, as shown in equation (2).

[0070]

[0071] Where, ω i This represents the failure impact coefficient of the i-th logistics subsystem.

[0072] For example, for the AI-powered appointment intelligent module subsystem, influencing factors include the degree to which AI-powered appointment intelligently identifies user intent. 11 The ability to configure SMS templates for specific items and product categories. 12 The on-site delivery check-in module subsystem is influenced by factors including the route congestion level (f). 21 And GIS positioning accuracy f 33 The completion feedback module subsystem includes factors such as the clarity of photos taken by the app. 41 and special text for completion feedback information f 32 The severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor can be obtained from real statistical data, as shown in Table 1, which shows the failure impact values ​​of each logistics subsystem.

[0073] Table 1

[0074]

[0075] After obtaining the fault impact values ​​of each logistics subsystem from Table 1, the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem and the total fault impact value, as shown in Table 2. The total fault impact value is the sum of the fault impact values ​​of each logistics subsystem.

[0076] Table 2

[0077]

[0078] In embodiments of the present invention, such as Figure 3 As shown, the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem are determined based on the relationships between them, including:

[0079] Step S301: Determine the number of interactions for each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them;

[0080] Step S302: Determine the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the number of interactions between each logistics subsystem.

[0081] In this embodiment of the invention, the number of interactions in each logistics subsystem includes the number of interfaces in each logistics subsystem and the number of submodules in each logistics subsystem. Based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems, the interaction methods between them can be determined, thereby determining the number of interfaces in each logistics subsystem. The number of interfaces can include the number of internal interfaces and the number of external interfaces. Simultaneously, the number of submodules in each logistics subsystem can also be determined. Then, based on the number of interactions in each logistics subsystem, the importance parameter of each subsystem can be determined.

[0082] In this embodiment of the invention, the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem can be determined based on the number of interactions of each logistics subsystem and the sum of the number of interactions of all logistics subsystems. That is, the ratio of the number of interactions of each logistics subsystem to the sum of the number of interactions of all logistics subsystems is used as the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem.

[0083] For example, the number of interfaces of the i-th logistics subsystem is in i The number of submodules is sn i The importance parameter of the logistics subsystem is determined according to equation (3).

[0084]

[0085] Table 3 shows the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem.

[0086] Table 3

[0087]

[0088] In this embodiment of the invention, determining the reliability of each logistics subsystem includes:

[0089] The reliability of the logistics system is determined based on the preset failure probability of the logistics system;

[0090] The reliability value of each logistics subsystem within the overall logistics system is determined based on its failure impact coefficient and importance parameters.

[0091] The reliability of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the reliability and reliability level values ​​of the logistics system.

[0092] In this embodiment of the invention, after determining the fault impact coefficient and importance parameter of each logistics subsystem, the reliability of each logistics subsystem can be determined by combining it with the preset failure probability of the logistics system. The preset failure probability of the logistics system can be set according to business requirements. The reliability of the logistics system can be determined based on this preset failure probability. The sum of the preset failure probability and the reliability is 1. Then, the product of the fault impact coefficient and the importance parameter of the logistics subsystem is determined, and the result of this product is used as the reliability value of the logistics subsystem in the logistics system. This reliability value is the ratio of the reliability of the logistics subsystem to the reliability of the logistics system. Based on the reliability of the logistics system and the reliability value, the reliability of the logistics subsystem can be determined.

[0093] For example, the reliability value of the logistics subsystem in the entire logistics system is the reliability r of the logistics subsystem. i The ratio of the reliability R of the logistics system to the reliability R of the logistics system is shown in equation (4).

[0094]

[0095] The relationship between the reliability R of the logistics system and the preset failure probability λ of the logistics system is R = 1 - λ. Combining with equation (4), the reliability of each logistics subsystem is obtained, as shown in equation (5).

[0096]

[0097] Table 4 shows the reliability of each logistics subsystem.

[0098] Table 4

[0099]

[0100] After obtaining the reliability of each logistics subsystem, the architecture of the logistics system and its subsystems can be adjusted based on the reliability of each subsystem to reduce the probability of failure.

[0101] The method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided in this invention first determines the corresponding logistics subsystems and their interrelationships based on the business scenario. Then, it determines the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on its various influencing factors. Next, it determines the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the interrelationships. Finally, based on the failure impact coefficient and importance parameter, combined with the preset failure probability of the logistics system, it determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem. This allows for the redesign of the logistics system architecture based on the reliability of each subsystem. This method quantitatively determines the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem through its various influencing factors, quantitatively determines the importance impact parameter based on the interrelationships, and then quantitatively determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem. This method improves the accuracy and rationality of system reliability assessment. The reliability of each logistics subsystem obtained through this method can identify and resolve unstable factors in the logistics system during the system architecture design phase, enabling early redesign at the architecture level to avoid probable system failures and improve the robustness and reliability of the logistics system.

[0102] According to another aspect of the embodiments of the present invention, such as Figure 4 As shown, an apparatus 400 for reliability assessment of a logistics system is provided, comprising:

[0103] The first determining module 401 determines the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenario and the relationships between the various logistics subsystems.

[0104] The second determining module 402 determines each influencing factor of each logistics subsystem, so as to determine the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem based on each influencing factor;

[0105] The third determining module 403 determines the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the relationship between the various logistics subsystems;

[0106] The fourth determination module 404 determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on the failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability of each logistics subsystem.

[0107] In this embodiment of the invention, the second determining module 402 is further configured to: obtain the severity value and occurrence value of each influencing factor of each logistics subsystem; determine the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem based on the severity value and occurrence value of each influencing factor; and determine the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem.

[0108] In this embodiment of the invention, the second determining module 402 is further configured to: determine the fault impact degree value of each influencing factor based on the severity value and occurrence degree value of each influencing factor of each logistics subsystem; and determine the fault impact degree value of the logistics subsystem based on the fault impact degree values ​​of each influencing factor.

[0109] In this embodiment of the invention, the second determining module 402 is further configured to: determine the total fault impact value based on the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem; and determine the fault impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the fault impact value of each logistics subsystem and the total fault impact value.

[0110] In this embodiment of the invention, the third determining module 403 is further configured to: determine the number of interactions of each logistics subsystem based on the relationship between the various logistics subsystems; and determine the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the number of interactions of each logistics subsystem.

[0111] In this embodiment of the invention, the number of interactions in each logistics subsystem includes the number of interfaces in each logistics subsystem and the number of sub-modules in each logistics subsystem.

[0112] In this embodiment of the invention, the fourth determining module 404 is further configured to: determine the reliability of the logistics system based on the preset failure probability of the logistics system; determine the reliability value of the logistics subsystem in the logistics system based on the failure influence coefficient and importance parameter of each logistics subsystem; and determine the reliability of the logistics subsystem based on the reliability of the logistics system and the reliability value.

[0113] According to another aspect of the present invention, an electronic device is provided, comprising: one or more processors; and a storage device for storing one or more programs, wherein when the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided by the present invention.

[0114] According to another aspect of the present invention, a computer-readable medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided by the present invention.

[0115] Figure 5An exemplary system architecture 500 is shown, which can be applied to the method or apparatus for reliability assessment of logistics systems according to embodiments of the present invention.

[0116] like Figure 5 As shown, system architecture 500 may include terminal devices 501, 502, and 503, a network 504, and a server 505. Network 504 serves as the medium for providing communication links between terminal devices 501, 502, and 503 and server 505. Network 504 may include various connection types, such as wired or wireless communication links, or fiber optic cables, etc.

[0117] Users can use terminal devices 501, 502, and 503 to interact with server 505 via network 504 to receive or send messages, etc. Various communication client applications can be installed on terminal devices 501, 502, and 503, such as shopping applications, web browser applications, search applications, instant messaging tools, email clients, social media platform software, etc. (for example only).

[0118] Terminal devices 501, 502, and 503 can be various electronic devices with displays that support web browsing, including but not limited to smartphones, tablets, laptops, and desktop computers.

[0119] Server 505 can be a server that provides various services, such as a backend management server that supports shopping websites browsed by users using terminal devices 501, 502, and 503 (for example only). The backend management server can analyze and process data such as received product information query requests, and feed back the processing results (such as target push information, product information - for example only) to the terminal device.

[0120] It should be noted that the logistics system reliability assessment method provided in this embodiment of the invention is generally executed by server 505, and correspondingly, the logistics system reliability assessment device is generally set in server 505.

[0121] It should be understood that Figure 5 The number of terminal devices, networks, and servers shown is merely illustrative. Depending on implementation needs, any number of terminal devices, networks, and servers can be included.

[0122] The following is for reference. Figure 6 It shows a schematic diagram of the structure of a computer system 600 suitable for implementing a terminal device of the present invention. Figure 6 The terminal device shown is merely an example and should not impose any limitations on the functionality and scope of use of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0123] like Figure 6As shown, the computer system 600 includes a central processing unit (CPU) 601, which can perform various appropriate actions and processes based on programs stored in read-only memory (ROM) 602 or programs loaded from storage section 608 into random access memory (RAM) 603. The RAM 603 also stores various programs and data required for the operation of the system 600. The CPU 601, ROM 602, and RAM 603 are interconnected via a bus 604. An input / output (I / O) interface 605 is also connected to the bus 604.

[0124] The following components are connected to I / O interface 605: an input section 606 including a keyboard, mouse, etc.; an output section 607 including a cathode ray tube (CRT), liquid crystal display (LCD), etc., and speakers, etc.; a storage section 608 including a hard disk, etc.; and a communication section 609 including a network interface card such as a LAN card, modem, etc. The communication section 609 performs communication processing via a network such as the Internet. A drive 610 is also connected to I / O interface 605 as needed. A removable medium 611, such as a disk, optical disk, magneto-optical disk, semiconductor memory, etc., is installed on drive 610 as needed so that computer programs read from it can be installed into storage section 608 as needed.

[0125] In particular, according to the embodiments disclosed in this invention, the processes described above with reference to the flowcharts can be implemented as computer software programs. For example, embodiments disclosed in this invention include a computer program product comprising a computer program carried on a computer-readable medium, the computer program containing program code for performing the methods shown in the flowcharts. In such embodiments, the computer program can be downloaded and installed from a network via communication section 609, and / or installed from removable medium 611. When the computer program is executed by central processing unit (CPU) 601, it performs the functions defined above in the system of this invention.

[0126] It should be noted that the computer-readable medium shown in this invention can be a computer-readable signal medium or a computer-readable storage medium, or any combination thereof. A computer-readable storage medium can be, for example,—but not limited to—an electrical, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any combination thereof. More specific examples of a computer-readable storage medium may include, but are not limited to: an electrical connection having one or more wires, a portable computer disk, a hard disk, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), optical fiber, portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), optical storage device, magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination thereof. In this invention, a computer-readable storage medium can be any tangible medium containing or storing a program that can be used by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. In this invention, a computer-readable signal medium can include a data signal propagated in baseband or as part of a carrier wave, carrying computer-readable program code. Such propagated data signals can take various forms, including but not limited to electromagnetic signals, optical signals, or any suitable combination thereof. Computer-readable signal media can also be any computer-readable medium other than computer-readable storage media, which can send, propagate, or transmit a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. The program code contained on the computer-readable medium can be transmitted using any suitable medium, including but not limited to: wireless, wire, optical fiber, RF, etc., or any suitable combination thereof.

[0127] The flowcharts and block diagrams in the accompanying drawings illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods, and computer program products according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in a flowchart or block diagram may represent a module, segment, or portion of code containing one or more executable instructions for implementing a specified logical function. It should also be noted that in some alternative implementations, the functions indicated in the blocks may occur in a different order than those indicated in the drawings. For example, two consecutively indicated blocks may actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they may sometimes be executed in reverse order, depending on the functions involved. It should also be noted that each block in a block diagram or flowchart, and combinations of blocks in a block diagram or flowchart, may be implemented using a dedicated hardware-based system that performs the specified function or operation, or using a combination of dedicated hardware and computer instructions.

[0128] The modules described in the embodiments of the present invention can be implemented in software or hardware. The described modules can also be housed in a processor; for example, a processor may be described as including a first determining module, a second determining module, a third determining module, and a fourth determining module. The names of these modules do not necessarily limit the module itself; for example, the first determining module may also be described as "a module for determining the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system corresponding to the business scenario and the relationships between the various logistics subsystems."

[0129] In another aspect, the present invention also provides a computer-readable medium, which may be included in the device described in the above embodiments; or it may exist independently and not assembled into the device. The computer-readable medium carries one or more programs, which, when executed by the device, cause the device to: determine various logistics subsystems in a logistics system corresponding to a business scenario and the relationships between these subsystems; determine various influencing factors for each logistics subsystem to determine a failure impact coefficient for that subsystem based on these factors; determine an importance parameter for each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them; and determine the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

[0130] According to the technical solution of the embodiments of the present invention, the method for reliability assessment of a logistics system provided by the embodiments of the present invention first determines the corresponding logistics subsystems and the relationships between them based on the business scenario. Then, it determines the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem based on the various influencing factors of each logistics subsystem. It then determines the importance parameter of each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them. Finally, it determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on the failure impact coefficient and the importance parameter, combined with the preset failure probability of the logistics system. This allows for the redesign of the logistics system architecture based on the reliability of each logistics subsystem. This method quantitatively determines the failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem through various influencing factors, quantitatively determines the importance impact parameter based on the relationships between them, and then quantitatively determines the reliability of the logistics subsystem. This method improves the accuracy and rationality of system reliability assessment. The reliability of each logistics subsystem obtained by this method can identify and resolve unstable factors in the logistics system during the system architecture design stage, thereby enabling early redesign at the architecture level to avoid probable system failures and improve the robustness and reliability of the logistics system.

[0131] The specific embodiments described above do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this invention. Those skilled in the art should understand that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations, and substitutions can occur depending on design requirements and other factors. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of this invention should be included within the scope of protection of this invention.

Claims

1. A method for reliability assessment of a logistics system, characterized in that, include: Identify the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenarios, as well as the relationships between these subsystems. Identify the various influencing factors for each logistics subsystem, and determine the failure impact coefficient of that logistics subsystem based on these factors. The importance parameters of each logistics subsystem are determined based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems. The reliability of each logistics subsystem is determined based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The failure impact coefficient of this logistics subsystem is determined based on various influencing factors, including: Obtain the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor for each logistics subsystem; Based on the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor, determine the degree of failure impact of each logistics subsystem; The failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact degree value of each logistics subsystem.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, Determine the impact value of each logistics subsystem failure, including: Based on the severity and occurrence values ​​of each influencing factor in each logistics subsystem, determine the failure impact value of each influencing factor; The failure impact level of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact level values ​​of each influencing factor.

4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact severity value of each subsystem, including: The total failure impact value is determined based on the failure impact values ​​of each logistics subsystem. The failure impact coefficient of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the failure impact value of each subsystem and the total failure impact value.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The importance parameters of each logistics subsystem are determined based on the relationships between them, including: The number of interactions for each logistics subsystem is determined based on the relationships between the various logistics subsystems. The importance parameter of each logistics subsystem is determined based on the number of interactions between the various logistics subsystems.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that, The number of interactions in each logistics subsystem includes the number of interfaces in each logistics subsystem and the number of sub-modules in each logistics subsystem.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Determine the reliability of each logistics subsystem, including: The reliability of the logistics system is determined based on the preset failure probability of the logistics system; The reliability value of each logistics subsystem in the logistics system is determined based on the failure impact coefficient and importance parameter of each logistics subsystem. The reliability of the logistics subsystem is determined based on the reliability of the logistics system and the reliability level value.

8. An apparatus for reliability assessment of a logistics system, characterized in that, include: The first determination module determines the various logistics subsystems in the logistics system that correspond to the business scenario, as well as the relationships between the various logistics subsystems. The second determination module determines the various influencing factors of each logistics subsystem, and determines the failure impact coefficient of the logistics subsystem based on each influencing factor. The third module determines the importance parameters of each logistics subsystem based on the relationships between them. The fourth determination module determines the reliability of each logistics subsystem based on its failure impact coefficient, importance parameter, and preset failure probability.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, include: One or more processors; Storage device for storing one or more programs. When the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implement the method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

10. A computer-readable medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the program is executed by the processor, it implements the method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

Images