428 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, VOL. R-31, NO.

5, DECEMBER 1982

A Cutset Approach to Reliability Evaluation

in Communication Networks
Suresh Rai b. Link states are s-independent. Failure of one link does
University of Roorkee, Roorkee not affect the probability of failure of other links.
c. Each link and the network have only 2 states: good
Key Words - Computer-communication network, Network reliability (operating) or bad (failed).
evaluation, Cutset approach, Network failure function. d. Call progress in the network is cycle-free. To ensure this,
assume that a traffic parcel does not switch twice through the
Reader Aids-
Purpose: Widen the state of the art same node in CCN.
Special math needed to use explanations: Boolean algebra, Graph theory Notation
Special math needed to use results: Same
Results useful to: Reliability theoreticians LIC linearly independent cutset
Summary & Conclusions - A global reliability measure called 'network SOP sum-of-product
reliability' (NR) is the probability that a call entering a probabilistic G reliability graph
network at any originating node can reach every other node. This concept N total number of cutsets
is quite useful in multiterminal networks such as computer networks and Ci cutset-i
parallel processors, etc. A simple technique is presented for evaluating
NR in symbolic form. The method is based on cutsets and is computationally
ni, xi node-i, link-i
Xi ,X
advantageous with respect to the spanning tree approach. It requires
fewer cutsets to be manipulated in the process of determining the NR
pi Xi
Pi, qj
logical success, failure of link-i
reliability, unreliability of link-i
expression. The number of cutsets is approximately half that of spanning (xi linearly independendent cutset-i
trees even for a small sized computer communication network and there is k number of nodes in G
a further improvement in the situation for larger networks. NR, NQ network reliability and unreliability
1. INTRODUCTION (NR + NQ= 1)
F network failure function. It is a Boolean SOP
The reliability analysis of a computer-communication net- expression formed by LICs.
work (CCN) is based on representing the network by a finite E Exclusive operator
linear graph whose nodes are switching entities and whose G) ring sum operator
links correspond to trunk groups provided on suitable trans- Other, standard notation is given in "Information for Readers
mission media. Recently Rai [1] has proposed a new global & Authors" at rear of each issue.
reliability measure called network reliability (NR) which refers
to the probability that a call entering the network at any Terminology
originating node is transmitted to all other communication Besides E-operator, some graph theoretic definitions which
centres (nodes). It is an appropriate performance measuring are useful in developing the procedure are listed below. They
term for multiterminal networks, viz. CCNs and parallel pro- are reproduced here to make the paper self-sufficient.
cessing networks [6]. The NR differs conceptually from termi- Exclusive operator [1] is an operator that operates on Boolean
nal reliability (TR), a commonly used term in reliability litera- expressions as follows-
ture for connectivity analysis. TR is the probability that a
specified node (source) can communicate with another specified E{X }=X1' (1 a)
node (sink) in the network [4]. It is useful with a 2-terminal
network model of a complex system. E{TI T2 ... Tm }-E{ T,}U T, E{T2 }U ... U T, T2
In [2] a method is described for calculating NR using the Tm- E{Tm } (lb)
concept of spanning trees. A spanning tree of a CCN G is a ET1U U T2U ... Tm }-E 'T1 }E 'T2 } . E{Tm } (1C)
subgraph that keep all nodes of G connected and has no cycles
[3]. This paper suggests an alternate method of calculating NR where Ti is any Boolean function. In the event that Ti = Xi; for
that is based on cutsets. It is simple and computationally all i, then (lb) and (1c) are modified to:
advantageous as it requires fewer terms (refer to figure 2) to be
manipulated compared with the spanning tree approach [2]. An E{X X Xm } =E{X }U X E{X2 }u ... UXI X2 ..
example illustrates the method. XmilE{Xm} = X1'UX,X21U ... UX,X2 ...XmilXm ............ ( l
2. ASSUMPTIONS, NOTATION, AND TERMINOLOGY E{X, U X2 U .....U Xm} = X1'X2' .......X
(le)
Assumptions Note from (1ld), that E-operator transforms a product term of
a. Links are half or full duplex. The network is modeled by Boolean variables into mutually disjoint terms. It, thus, differs
a graph with nonoriented edges. from DeMorgan's rule of Boolean complementation.

0018-9529/82/1200-0428$OO.75 1982 IEEE

RAI: A CUTSET APPROACH TO RELIABILITY EVALUATION IN COMMUNICATION NETWORKS
Example 1. Consider T, = Xi UX2 and T2 = XiX2.
the relations in (1)
E{T1 T'2 } X1'X2'U X1'X2 U XI X2';
=
E{?TI U T2 } = Xl X2
Minimal cutset of a connected graph G is a set of branches
whose removal from G leaves G disconnected, provided dele-
tion of any proper subset of these branches does not disconnect
G.
Edge disjoint union of cutsets is a union of cutsets no two of
which have any branch in common 13]. For example, two
cutsets (xl, x2) and (X6, X7) for figure 1 have no branches in
common. The set (xI , X2, X6, X7) is then an edge disjoint union
of cutsets.
Ring sum of an LIC,i with another ctj represents either a cutset
or an edge disjoint union of cutset, or the null set.
3. ALGORITHM
A 2-step approach using cutsets is described to evaluate
network unreliability NQ and hence the NR of a CCN. For
this, the original problem of a node communicating with all
other remaining communication centres is looked upon as a
complementary situation where communication between a node
with at least one of the other nodes in G is disrupted or
congested, thus leading to network unreliability. The steps are:
a. Enumerate all cutsets of G
b. Interpret Boolean algebraic statement of step a as a
probability expression.
Step al. Consider a complete, but minimal set of LICs.
They could be either fundamental cutsets with respect to any
spanning tree or (k-1) vertex cutsets and are, in turn, used as
generators [3] to enumerate all cutsets A* of G. Let
VL-{F21,.2.--- k-I } (2a) having fewer literals occurs first. This procedure helps in
(O c2, ..., ak-i ), there are ( k- l) terms
Ot I G)t2 ), (Ot I t3 ), *** (Ot
R2-1 I Otj ),Step b2. For each term Ci, 0is(N - 1), Ti is defined to be
***,(ak-2 a- )), there are ( k1') terms
P.*-i -(c1 @ 2 ..- @ ak-l ), there are (k-' ) terms
Thus any member of pL can represent a cutset, edge disjoint
union of cutsets, or the null set. Moreover all cutsets necessar-
ily appear in Ri and their size is at most-
(k-l) + (k-l1) + . + (kkjj) = 2k- -l (2b)
Step a2. Delete all edge disjoint unions of cutsets and empty
sets from > in (2a) and obtain j1A* which has all minimal cutsets
of G.
Example 2. For the network shown in figure 1, the four vertex
cutsets are:
429
Using OL = (xl, x2) CX3 = (Xl, X3, X4)
CX2 = (X6, X7) t4 = (X4, X5, X6)
Using to compute p.i's as:
cx, 's((XI,
RI =
x2), (X6 , X7 ), (XI , X3 , X4 ), (X4 , X5 , X6))
= ((X, X2, X6, X7 ), (X2 , X3 , X4 ), (XI , X2, X4 , , X6,
2
(X, X3, X4 , X6, X7 ), (X4 , X5 , X7 ), (X, X3, X5 , X6))
R3 = ((X2, X3, X4, X6, X7), (XI9 ,X4, X5, X7),
(X2, x3,X5, X6 ), (XI , x, X5, X7))
R4 = (X2, X3, X5, X7)
Elementslike(x I, x2 , x6 , X7, ),(X , X2 , X4, X5 , X6, ),(X, X3,
X4, X6, X7, ), (X2, X3, X5, X6, X7, ),and (xI , x2 X4 x5,X7,)
represent edge-disjoint union of cutsets. Delete them. Now,
the remaining 10 members constitute the set R* and hence the
total cutsets for figure 1. A computer program for step a has
been developed in ANSI FORTRAN IV and run on a DEC 20.
the source listing is given in a separately available Supplement
[5].
Step b2. A Boolean algebraic expression has a one-to-one
correspondence with the probability expression, if the Boolean
terms are modified either canonically or conservatively until
they represent a mutually disjoint grouping. The second approach
is preferred since it results in a disjoint expression with many
fewer terms as compared to canonical expression. The follow-
ing method computes network unreliability and hence the net-
work reliability by using the E-operator and the set R*. The
three substeps are
Step bl. For the purpose of network unreliability, let net-
work failure function F be defined as the event that the
communication between a node with all other nodes or a part
thereof is disrupted. F is the Boolean SOP expression:
F = CO U ... U CN- (3)
where Ci is formed from cutset-i by changing the link variable
Xi -> Xi'. The cutsets in (3) are arranged in such a way that a Ci
reducing the number of terms in the final symbolic unreliability
expression and hence the computer time.
the union of all predecessor terms C0, C1. Ci in which
any complemented literal that is present in both Ci and any of
the predecessor terms is deleted from those predecessor terms,
i.e.,
kTi =CO U Cl U ... U Ci-I Each complemented literal
of Ci ->1 (4)
T. can be simplified using standard Boolean reduction identi-
ties given in any switching theory book.
Step b3. Use E-operator to obtain E{TE} and hence:
F(disjoint) + C0 .U C1 E{Ti } (5)
1
The nature of the E-operator ensures that the term C1 E{T1 } in
F(disjoint) will have at least one literal which is uncomplemented
in this term and complemented in the predecessor term. There-
fore the network unreliability expression NQ is obtained from
(5) by changing Xi to P1 and Xi' to qi.
430 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON RELIABILITY, VOL. R-31, NO. 5, DECEMBER 1982

NQ = F(disjoint) Xi (Xi') -- pi (qj) (6) The output displays

A computer program for the entire problem including getting
the cutsets has been implemented in ANSI FORTRAN IV and
successfully run on a DEC 2050. The source listing is given in
the Supplement [51 and program is discussed in the appendix.
Example 3. To illustrate the algorithm, consider the 10 cutsets
obtained in example 2. They are arranged according to step b 1
as:
a. total number of cutsets generated from step i
b. a term F(i) which is equivalent to Ti-1 of table l; i= 2, 3,
, 10
c. the disjoint term(s) for each F(i). It is written beneath
F(i) and is equivalent to E{Ti-. } of table 1.
The equivalence in displays a-c is obtained by interpreting
1(-1) as complemented (uncomplemented) variable and 0 as if
the variable is absent.

F = X'X2'U XX6X7U X'X3'X4U X4X5X6U X2X3X4 4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

U X4'X5'X7' U X1'X3'X5'X6'U X2'X3'X5'X6'
U X1'X3'X5'X7'U X2'X3'X5'X7' (7) I thank my thesis supervisor Dr. K.K. Aggarwal, Professor
& Head Electronics Department, REC, Kurukshetra for his
valuable encouragement during the course of this work.
The Ti's and E{Ti}'s for i = 1 ... 9 are shown in table 1.
REFERENCES
Table I
[1] Suresh Rai, Some Aspects of Reliability of Computer and Communication
Terms for Example 3 Networks, PhD Thesis, Kurukshetra University, 1979. (Obtainable from
Ti C{Ti} the author, if available).
[2] K. K. Aggarwal, Suresh Rai, "Reliability evaluation in computer commu-
_it
Xl2' Xi U XI'X2 nication networks, " IEEE Trans. Reliability, vol R-30, 1981 Apr, pp
X2' U X6'X7' X2 (X6 U X6'X7) 32-35.
X1'X2' U X1tX3'U X7' X7 (XI U Xl'X2 X3 ) [3] N. Deo, Graph Theory with Applications to Engincering and Computer
XvU X6'X7'v X5'X6'
v
XI (X6 U X5 X6'X7 ) Science, Prentice Hall, 1974.
K.K. Aggarwal, J.S. Gupta, K.B. Misra, "A simple method for reliability
X6 (XI X3X'X'
XI'X2'U X6'UJ X 'X3'U X2'X3' X1'21 X'UX1X3U 6 ATXl-X
U X3'XI UX3'1'X2T2U
UX [4]
X3 'X A3)
evaluation of a communication system, IEEE Trans. Communication,
X2'U X4'U X7' X2 X4 X7 vol COM-23, 1975 May, pp 563-565.
XI'U X4U X7' XI X4X7 [5] Supplement: NAPS document No. 03881-B, 9 pages in this supplement.
X2' U X4'U X6' X2 X4 X6 For current ordering information, see 'Information for Readers and Authors'
in a current issue. Order NAPS document No. 03881, 39 pages. ASIS-
XI'U 'U X6' Xi X4X6 NAPS; Microfiche Publications; PO Box 3513, Grand Central Station;
New York, NY 10017 USA.
From (6) the unreliability is: [6] L.D. White, "Communication structures for large networks of microcom-
puters, " IEEE Trans. Computers, vol C-30, 1981 Apr, pp 264-273.
NQ = q, q2 + q6q7 (PI + q1P2 ) + q1 q3 q4 (P6 +P7 q6 )P2 APPENDIX
+ q4 q5 q6 (PI + q1 P2P3 )P7 + q2 q3 q4 (P6 + q6P5P7 )Pt
+ q4 q5 q7 (Pt P3 + q3PI P2 + q, P2P3 )P6 The computer program for the algorithm performs the following tasks
+ q, q3 q5 q6P2P4P7 r q2 q3 q5 q6 (Pt P4P7) a. INC formation
+ ql c q3 q7 (P2P4P6) + q2 q3 q5 q7 (Pt P4P6). (8) b. CUT enumeration
c. SMP subroutine
If the communication links have equal survival probabilities p, e. EDISI and FDIS2 formation
then (8) becomes: f. PROD subroutine and transformation of PROD entries into FDISI.
a. An (NCUT x NE) size INCidence matrix is formed from the input data
NQ 11 -21 p4 44p5 -32p6 + 8p7; p + q-l which include number of nodes (NCUT + 1), branches (NE), vertex cutsets,
and their degrees.
b. To enumerate cutsets in G, consider any two rows of INC at a time.
Using NR + NQ = 1, we have: Verify whether INC(I, J) is same as INC(K,J). If it is true, define INC(N, J) = 0;
otherwise INC(N, J) = 1.
NR = 21p4 - 44pS + 32p -8p7. (9) c. SMP (simplification) subroutine checks the subsuming (AU AB-A) of
one row by another row.
In deriving (8) we have assumed perfect nodes. The effect of d. From (4), a matrix F is generated. F is further simplified using SMP.
F(I. J)FDISl1
e. (FDIS2) is the disjoint array formed from the first (second) row of
imperfect nodes can be considered using the ideas in [4].
Example 3 has also been solved using the program in [5]. It f. PROD is the resultant disjoint array formed by adding columnwise row-i
takes 0.42 sec CPU time for its completion, including both of FDISl with row-] of FDIS2. The addition rule is
compilation and excution on a DEC 20. The sample input and
sample output are given in table 2. The input requires -1 + 1 - l + 0
a. number of nodes and branches in G -l - 1 = -l + 0 = -l o+
b. degrees of (k - 1) vertex cutsets used in 'c' as generators
c. (k - 1) vertex cutsets. PROD entries are tranformed in EDISI location to carry out the next iteration.
RAI: A CUTSET APPROACH TO RELIABILITY EVALUATION IN COMMUNICATION NETWORKS 431

Table 2
Computer Solution for Example 3
Sample Input
57
2233
1 2
67 AUTHOR
134
456 Dr. Suresh Rai, Reader; Electronics and Communication Engineering Depart-
Sample Output ment; University of Roorkee; Roorkee - 247672 INDIA.
TOTAL CUTSETS = 10 Suresh Rai was born in UP, INDIA in 1951. He graduated in 1972 in
11 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 1 1, 1 0 1 1 0 0 0, 0 0 0 1 1 0, 0 1 1I0 1 0 1, 0 1I1 1 0 0 Electronics and Communication Engineering from Banaras Hindu University,
0, 0 1 1 0 1 1 0, 1 0 1 0 1 0 1, 0 0 0 1 1 0 1, 1 0 1 0 1 1 0. Varanasi INDIA. He obtained his Masters degree (Communication Systems)
F(2) = 1 0 0 0 00, -1 0 0 0 0 0 0, 1 -1 0 0 0 0 0. in 1974 from University of Roorkee with first position in the class. He did his
F(3) = 0 1 0 0 0 0 0, O O O O OI 1, 0 - O O0O -1 0, 0 -1 0 0 0 1 -1. PhD in 1980 from Kurukshetra University on the topic: "Some aspects of
F(4) = 11 00000, 000000 1, I 0 1 0000, -1 00000-1, 1 -1 -1 000-1. reliability of computer and communication network. " He is working as Reader
F(5) = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0, -1 0 0 0 0 -1 0. with Electronics and Communication Engineering department, University of
F(6) = 1 000000, 00000 11, 00001 0, 000 I 0 1, -1 0oo-1 -I 0, -1 0 Roorkee. Dr. Rai is the coauthor of the book Waveshaping and Digital
0 0 1 -1 -1, -1 0 0 0 -1 1 -1. Circuits. He has nearly 25 research papers to his credit. His main research
F(7) = 1 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1, 0 0 0 1 0 0 0, -I 0 0 -I 0 0 -1, interests are reliability engineering, fault diagnosis in digital systems, digital
F(8) = 0 1 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 1 0, 0 0 0 1 0 0 0, 0 -1 0 -I 0 -1 0. signal processing, and parallel processing.
F(9) = 1 00000, 00000 10, 10 1 0000, 0 1 1 0000, - -1l000-1 0, -1 l
-1 0 0 -1 0, 1 -1 -1 0 0 -1 0. Manuscript TR81-75 received 1981 July 13; revised 1982 May 11 and 1982
F(10) = 0 1 00000, 000000 1, 000 1 000. 0-1 0-1 00-1. October 21.

Landmarks in R&M Engineering: 19

On Cost-Effectiveness
Metaphysical Electronics, Ltd. 4. Action Item R-104: Get-Well Plan. After lengthy
Internal Memorandum negotiations, we have our customer's agreement to reclas-
TO: Pluman Hatt sify - to non-relevant six of the failures of the minia-
-

Chief Meditator turized Psychoelectronic Converters. The reclassification

was based on our guarantee of the effectiveness of fixes to
SUBJECT: Action on Action Items be put into the design before production. We are now
This memo provides you this week's report on the status trying yg establish some fixes. Meanwhile the reject deci-
to
of action items sent to R&M Engineering by the Chief sion has been cleared. (Iwishmyconsciencewas.)
Meditator. Please take due notice of the comments that 5. Action Item R-105: Reduction of Overhead. In re-
have been appended to: Action Item, last. sponse to your memorandum, we have cancelled the sched-
1. Action Item R-101: Reduction of Part Costs. Per uled R&M orientation lectures and postponed indefinitely
your instruction we have obtained a waiver on the use of the publication of a Company Guidebook on R&M Design.
militar standard component parts for the Tactical Psychic 6. Action Item R-106: Reduction in Force. As direct-
sur- ed,
milctary standhaveordcomponent forrthemTcti
parts shic we have reduced our quality control inspection force by
Detector and have ordered the needed
eded parts from the 40.T'
40%.
sotneoeain,w ilrdc rm10
plus stock of the Hong Kong Salvage, Surplus, and Elec-. .To continue operation, we will reduce W from 100%
tronic Supply Company. We have their assurance, S l m inpconncrtaltesoasmlngln.W reu-
in writ-
tronic
ing, that their parts are the equal of those we waivered.
ytomer requirements do not permit this, we will require the
inspectors to shorten the time per unit inspeted.
2. Action Item R-i02: Reassignment of Engineering 7.AtoIemR0:RduinofSr ae.syu
Personnel. As directed, we have cancelled the test, analyze, se ehv netgtdtestain ti ut orc
and fix (TAAF) program for the Superkludge system and
reassigned the personnel to the proposal writing unit. ta h muto'srppoue eei ecigaam
3. AtionItemR-10: Spedupof Shedue. A re ing proportions. You are most observant and astute.
quested, we have cancelled the company operating instruc- reomndto In view of the preceding six action items, however, my
ista . o ernT oeSrp
tion requiring the R&M Engineering Department to re-
view and approve proposed designs for the Conformal Psy- A. Flunkie
choelectronic Detector. Manager, R&M ......... [oo