34
Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG November 5-6, 2009 RiskSIG - Advancing the State of the Art RiskSIG - Advancing the State of the Art A collaboration of the A collaboration of the PMI, Rome Italy Chapter PMI, Rome Italy Chapter and the RiskSIG and the RiskSIG Project Risk Management – Project Risk Management – An International An International Perspective” Perspective”

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIGNovember 5-6, 2009 RiskSIG - Advancing the State of the Art A collaboration of the PMI, Rome Italy Chapter and the RiskSIG

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIGNovember 5-6, 2009

RiskSIG - Advancing the State of the ArtRiskSIG - Advancing the State of the Art

A collaboration of theA collaboration of the PMI, Rome Italy Chapter PMI, Rome Italy Chapter

and the RiskSIGand the RiskSIG

““Project Risk Management – Project Risk Management – An International An International

Perspective”Perspective”

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 2November 5-6, 2009

Bayesian Networks:

A Novel Approach

For Modelling Uncertainty in Projects

By: Vahid Khodakarami

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 3November 5-6, 2009

Outline:

What is missing in current PRM practice? Bayesian Networks Application of BNs in PRM Models Case study

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 4November 5-6, 2009

Conceptual steps in PRMP

Risk IdentificationQualitative Analysis

Risk Analysis (Risk Measurement)Quantitative Analysis

Risk Response (Mitigation)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 5November 5-6, 2009

Project Scheduling Under uncertainty

(CPM) PERT Simulation Critical chain

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 6November 5-6, 2009

What is missing?

Causality in project uncertainty Estimation and Subjectivity Unknown Risks (Common cause factors) Trade-off between time, cost and

performance Dynamic Learning

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 7November 5-6, 2009

Bayesian Networks (BNs)

Graphical modelNodes (variables)Arcs (causality)

Probabilistic (Bayesian) inference

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 8November 5-6, 2009

Bayesian vs. Frequentist

Frequentist Bayesian

Variables Random Uncertain

Probability

Physical Property

(Data)

Degree of belief (Subjective)

Inference Confidence interval

Bayes’ Theorem

only feasible

method for many

practical problems

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 9November 5-6, 2009

Bayes’ Theorem

‘A’ represents hypothesis and ‘B’ represents evidence.

P(A) is called ‘prior distribution’. P(B/A) is called ’Likelihood function’. P(A/B) is called ’Posterior distribution’ .

( / ) ( )( / )

( )

P B A P AP A B

P B

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 10November 5-6, 2009

Constructing BN

High 0.7

Low 0.3

On time 0.95

Late 0.05

Prior Probability

Sub-contract On time Late

Staff Experience High Low High Low No 0.99 0.8 0.7 0.02Delay Yes 0.01 0.2 0.3 0.98

Conditional Probability

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 11November 5-6, 2009

Inference in BN(cause to effect)

With no other information

P(Delay)=0.14.4

Knowing the sub-contract is late

P(Delay)=0.50.7

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 12November 5-6, 2009

Backward Propagation(effect to cause)

Prior probability with no data

(0.7,0.3)

Posterior (learnt) probability

(0.28,0.72)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 13November 5-6, 2009

BNs Advantages

Rigorous method to make formal use of subjective data Explicitly quantify uncertainty Make predictions with incomplete data Reason from effect to cause as well as from cause to effect Update previous beliefs in the light of new data (learning) Complex sensitivity analysis

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 14November 5-6, 2009

BNs Applications

Industrial Processor Fault Diagnosis - by

Intel Auxiliary Turbine Diagnosis -

by GE Diagnosis of space shuttle

propulsion systems - by NASA/Rockwell

Situation assessment for nuclear power plant – NRC

Medical Diagnosis Internal Medicine Pathology diagnosis - Breast Cancer Manager

Commercial Software troubleshooting and

advice – MS-Office Financial Market Analysis Information Retrieval Software Defect detection

Military Automatic Target Recognition

– MITRE Autonomous control of

unmanned underwater vehicle - Lockheed Martin

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 15November 5-6, 2009

Bayesian CPM

ES

D

EFLF

LS

PredecessorActivities

SuccessorActivities

Su

ccesso

rs

Pred

ecesso

rs

Duration Model

CPM Calculation[ j ]jES Max EF one of the predecessor activities |

EF ES D

LS LF D

[ j ]jLF Min LS one of the successor activities | Slack LS ES LF EF

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 16November 5-6, 2009

BCPM Example

D=5 EF=5

LS=0 Slack=0 LF=5

ES=0

A

D=4 EF=9

LS=9 Slack=4 LF=13

ES=5

B

D=10 EF=15

LS=5 Slack=0 LF=15

ES=5

C

D=2 EF=11

LS=13 Slack=4 LF=15

ES=9

D

D=5 EF=20

LS=15 Slack=0 LF=20

ES=15

E

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 17November 5-6, 2009

Activity Duration

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 18November 5-6, 2009

Trade off

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 19November 5-6, 2009

Trade off (Prior vs. required resources )

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 20November 5-6, 2009

Known Risk

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 21November 5-6, 2009

Known Risk (Control)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 22November 5-6, 2009

Known Risk (Impact)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 23November 5-6, 2009

Known Risk (Response)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 24November 5-6, 2009

Unknown Factors

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 25November 5-6, 2009

Unknown Factors (Learning)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 26November 5-6, 2009

Learnt distribution

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 27November 5-6, 2009

Total Duration

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 28November 5-6, 2009

Case Study (construction Project)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 29November 5-6, 2009

Case Study (Bayesian CPM)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 30November 5-6, 2009

Case Study (predictive)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 31November 5-6, 2009

Case Study (diagnostic)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 32November 5-6, 2009

Case Study (learning)

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 33November 5-6, 2009

Summary

Current practice in modelling risk in project time management has serious limitations

BNs are particularly suitable for modelling uncertainty in project

The proposed models provide a new generation of project risk assessment tools that are better informed and hence, more valid

Copyright © 2009 PMI RiskSIG Slide 34November 5-6, 2009

Questions?

Thank you for your attention