[1] A. M., Abdel-Moneim and F. W., Leysieffer, Weak lumpability in finite Markov chains, J. of Appl. Probability, 19:685–691, 1982.Google Scholar

[2] S., Asmussen, Applied Probability and Queues, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, 2003.Google Scholar

[3] A., Avizienis, J. C., Laprie, B., Randell, and C., Landwehr, Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing, IEEE Trans. on Dependable and Secure Computing, 1:11–33, January 2004.Google Scholar

[4] J., Banks, J. S., Carson, B. L., Nelson, and D. M., Nicol, Discrete-Event System Simulation, 5th ed. Prentice-Hall international series in industrial and systems engineering. Prentice Hall, July 2009.Google Scholar

[5] R. E., Barlow and L. C., Hunter, Reliability analysis of a one unit system, Operations Research, 9(2):200–208, 1961.Google Scholar

[6] M., Bladt, B., Meini, M., Neuts, and B., Sericola, Distribution of reward functions on continuous-time Markov chains, in Proc. of the 4th Int. Conf. on Matrix Analytic Methods in Stochastic Models (MAM4), Adelaide, Australia, July 2002.Google Scholar

[7] A., Bobbio and K. S., Trivedi, An aggregation technique for the transient analysis of stiff Markov chains, IEEE Trans. on Computers, C-35(9):803–814, September 1986.Google Scholar

[8] Z. I., Botev, P., L'Ecuyer, and B., Tuffin, Markov chain importance sampling with applications to rare event probability estimation, Statistics and Computing, 23(2):271–285, 2013.Google Scholar

[9] P. N., Bowerman, R. G., Nolty, and E. M., Scheuer, Calculation of the Poisson cumulative distribution function, IEEE Trans. on Reliability, 39:158–161, 1990.Google Scholar

[10] P., Brémaud, Markov Chains: Gibbs Fields, Monte Carlo Simulation and Queues. Springer, 1998.Google Scholar

[11] H., Cancela, M. El, Khadiri, and G., Rubino, Rare events analysis by Monte Carlo techniques in static models, in G., Rubino and B., Tufin, Eds, Rare Event Simulation Using Monte Carlo Methods, chapter 7, pages 145–170. Chichester: J. Wiley, 2009.Google Scholar

[12] H., Cancela, G., Rubino, and B., Tufin, MTTF Estimation by Monte Carlo Methods using Markov models, Monte Carlo Methods and Applications, 8(4):312–341, 2002.Google Scholar

[13] H., Cancela, G., Rubino, and M., Urquhart, Pathset-based conditioning for transient simulation of highly dependable networks, in Proc. of the 7th IFAC Symp. on Cost Oriented Automation, Ottawa, Canada, 2004. (Also presented in “5th International Conference on Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods”, Juan les Pins, France, June 2004.)Google Scholar

[14] J. A., Carrasco, Failure distance based on simulation of repairable fault tolerant systems, in Proc. of the 5th Int. Conf. on Modelling Techniques and Tools for Computer Performance Evaluation, pages 351–365, 1991.Google Scholar

[15] J. A., Carrasco, Improving availability bounds using the failure distance concept, in 4th Int. Conf. on Dependable Computing for Critical Applications (DCCA'4), San Diego, USA, January 1994.Google Scholar

[16] J. A., Carrasco, H., Nabli, B., Sericola, and V., Sunie, Comment on “Performability analysis: A new algorithm”, IEEE Trans. on Computers, C-59:137–138, January 2010.Google Scholar

[17] F., Castella, G., Dujardin, and B., Sericola, Moments' analysis in homogeneous Markov reward models, Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 11(4):583–601, 2009.Google Scholar

[18] G., Ciardo, R., Marie, B., Sericola, and K. S., Trivedi, Performability analysis using semi-Markov reward processes, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-39:1251–1264, October 1990.Google Scholar

[19] B., Ciciani and V., Grassi, Performability evaluation of fault-tolerant satellite systems, IEEE Trans. on Commun., COM-35:403-409, April 1987.Google Scholar

[20] C. J., Colbourn, The Combinatorics of Network Reliability. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.Google Scholar

[21] A. E., Conway and A., Goyal, Monte Carlo simulation of computer system availability/reliability models, in Proc. of the 17th Symp. on Fault-Tolerant Computing, pages 230–235, Pittsburg, USA, July 1987.Google Scholar

[22] P.-J., Courtois and P., Semal, Bounds for the positive eigenvectors of nonnegative matrices and for their approximations by decomposition, J. of the Assoc. for Computing Machinery, 31(4):804–825, October 1984.Google Scholar

[23] P.-J., Courtois and P., Semal, Computable bounds for conditional steady-state probabilities in large Markov chains and queueing models, IEEE Trans. on Selected Areas in Commun., 4(6):926–936, September 1986.Google Scholar

[24] A. P., Couto da Silva and G., Rubino, Bounding the mean cumulated reward up to absorption, in A., Langville and W. J., Stewart, Eds, Markov Anniversary Meeting, chapter 22, pages 169–188. Boson Books, 2006.Google Scholar

[25] A., Csenki, Dependability for Systems with a Partitioned State Space. Markov and semi-Markov theory and computational implementation, volume 90 of Lecture Notes in Statistics. Springer-Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar

[26] J. N., Darroch and E., Seneta, On quasi-stationary distributions in absorbing discrete-time finite Markov chains, J. of Appl. Probability, 2:88–100, 1965.Google Scholar

[27] H. A., David, Order Statistics. New York – London - Sidney – Toronto: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1981.Google Scholar

[28] E. de Souza e, Silva and H. R., Gail, Calculating cumulative operational time distributions of repairable computer systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-35:322–332, April 1986.Google Scholar

[29] E. de Souza e, Silva and H. R., Gail, Calculating availability and performability measures of repairable computer systems using randomization, J. of the Assoc. for Computing Machinery, 36:171–193, January 1989.Google Scholar

[30] E. de Souza e, Silva and H. R., Gail, An algorithm to calculate transient distributions of cumulative rate and impulse based reward, Commun. in Stat. – Stochastic Models, 14(3), 1998.Google Scholar

[31] P., Diaconis, The Markov chain Monte Carlo revolution, Bulletin of the American Math. Soc., 46(2):179–205, November 2008.Google Scholar

[32] L., Donatiello and V., Grassi, On evaluating the cumulative performance distribution of fault-tolerant computer systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 40:1301–1307, November 1991.Google Scholar

[33] L., Donatiello and B. R., Iyer, Analysis of a composite performance measure for fault-tolerant systems, J. of the Assoc. for Computing Machinery, 34:179–189, January 1987.Google Scholar

[34] J. B., Dugan and K. S., Trivedi, Coverage modeling for dependability analysis of fault-tolerant systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 38(6):775–787, June 1989.Google Scholar

[35] G. S., Fishman, Discrete-Event Simulation: Modeling, Programming, and Analysis. Springer Series in Operations Research and Financial Engineering. Springer, 2012.Google Scholar

[36] D., Furchtgott and J. F., Meyer, A performability solution method for degradable nonre-pairable systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-33:550-554, July 1984.Google Scholar

[37] P., Glasserman, Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. Springer, 2003.Google Scholar

[38] P. W., Glynn and D. L., Iglehart, Simulation methods for queues: An overview, Queueing Systems, 3(3):221–255, 1988.Google Scholar

[39] B. V., Gnedenko, Y. K., Belyayev, and A. D., Solovyev, Mathematical Methods ofReliability. New York: Academic Press, 1969.Google Scholar

[40] H., Gould, J., Tobochnik, and C., Wolfgang, An Introduction to Computer Simulation Methods: Applications to Physical Systems, 3rd ed. Boston, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., 2005.Google Scholar

[41] A., Goyal, P., Shahabuddin, P., Heidelberger, V. F., Nicola, and P. W., Glynn, A uniied framework for simulating Markovian models of highly dependable systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 41(1):36–51, January 1992.Google Scholar

[42] A., Goyal and A. N., Tantawi, Evaluation of performability for degradable computer systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-36:738–744, June 1987.Google Scholar

[43] V., Grassi, L., Donatiello, and G., Iazeolla, Performability evaluation of multi-component fault-tolerant systems, IEEE Trans. on Rel., 37(2):216–222, June 1988.Google Scholar

[44] W. K., Grassmann, M. I., Taksar, and D. P., Heyman, Regenerative analysis and steady-state distributions for Markov chains, Operations Research, 33(5):1107–1116, 1985.Google Scholar

[45] P., Heidelberger, Fast simulation of rare events in queueing and reliability models, ACM Trans. on Modeling and Comput. Simulations, 54(1):43–85, January 1995.Google Scholar

[46] B. R., Iyer, L., Donatiello, and P., Heidelberger, Analysis of performability for stochastic models of fault-tolerant systems, IEEETrans. on Comput., C-35:902–907, October 1986.Google Scholar

[47] P., Joubert, G., Rubino, and B., Sericola, Performability analysis of two approaches to fault tolerance. Technical Report 3009, INRIA, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France, July 1996.Google Scholar

[48] S., Karlin and H. W., Taylor, A First Course in Stochastic Processes. NewYork – San Francisco – London: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar

[49] J., Katzmann, System architecture for non-stop computing, in 14th IEEE Comp. Soc. Int. Conf, pages 77–80, 1977.Google Scholar

[50] J. G., Kemeny and J. L., Snell, Finite Markov Chains. New York Heidelberg Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1976.Google Scholar

[51] V. G., Kulkarni, V. F., Nicola, R. M., Smith, and K. S., Trivedi, Numerical evaluation of performability and job completion time in repairable fault-tolerant systems, in Proc. IEEE 16th Fault-Tolerant Computing Symp., (FTCS'16), pages 252–257, Vienna, Austria, July 1986.Google Scholar

[52] S. S., Lavenberg, Computer Performance Modeling Handbook. Notes and reports in computer science and applied mathematics. Academic Press, 1983.Google Scholar

[53] G. Le, Lann, Algorithms for distributed data-sharing systems which use tickets, in Proc. of the 3rd Berkeley Workshop on Distributed Data Base and Comput. Networks, Berkeley, USA, 1978.Google Scholar

[54] P., L'Ecuyer, M., Mandjes, and B., Tufin, Importance sampling in rare event simulation, in G., Rubino and B., Tufin, Eds, Rare Event Simulation using Monte Carlo Methods, chapter 2, pages 17–38. Chichester: J. Wiley, 2009.Google Scholar

[55] P., L'Ecuyer, G., Rubino, S., Saggadi, and B., Tufin, Approximate zero-variance importance sampling for static network reliability estimation, IEEE Trans. on Reliability, 60(3):590–604, 2011.Google Scholar

[56] J., Ledoux, On weak lumpability of denumerable Markov chains. Stat. and Probability Lett., 25:329–339, 1995.Google Scholar

[57] J., Ledoux, A geometric invariant in weak lumpability of inite Markov chains, J. of Appl. Probability, 34(4):847–858, 1997.Google Scholar

[58] J., Ledoux, G., Rubino, and B., Sericola, Exact aggregation of absorbing Markov processes using the quasi-stationary distribution, J. of Appl. Probability, 31:626–634, 1994.Google Scholar

[59] J., Ledoux and B., Sericola, On the probability distribution of additive functionals of jump Markov processes, in Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Appl. Probability (IWAP'08), Compiégne, France, July 2008.Google Scholar

[60] E. E., Lewis and F., Böhm, Monte Carlo simulation of Markov unreliability models, Nucl. Eng. and Design, 77:49–62, 1984.Google Scholar

[61] C., Liceaga and D., Siewiorek, Automatic specification of reliability models for fault tolerant computers. Technical Report 3301, NASA, July 1993.Google Scholar

[62] S., Mahévas and G., Rubino, Bound computation of dependability and performance measures, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 50(5):399–413, May 2001.Google Scholar

[63] M., Malhotra, J. K., Muppala, and K. S., Trivedi, Stiffness-tolerant methods for transient analysis of stiff Markov chains, Microelectronics and Rel., 34(11):1825–1841, 1994.Google Scholar

[64] T. H., Matheiss and D. S., Rubin, A survey and comparison of methods for finding all vertices of convex polyhedral sets, Math. of Operations Research, 5(2):167–185, 1980.Google Scholar

[65] C. D., Meyer, Stochastic complementation, uncoupling Markov chains and the theory of nearly reducible systems, Siam Review, 31(2):240–272, 1989.Google Scholar

[66] J. F., Meyer, On evaluating the performability of degradable computing systems. IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-29:720–731, August 1980.Google Scholar

[67] J. F., Meyer, Closed-form solutions for performability, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-31:648–657, July 1982.Google Scholar

[68] J., Misra, Detecting termination of distributed computations using markers, in Proc. of the 2nd Annual ACM Symp. on Principles of Distributed Computing, Montreal, Canada, 1983.Google Scholar

[69] R. R., Muntz, E. de Souza e, Silva, and A., Goyal, Bounding availability of repairable computer systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput. 38(12):1714–1723, December 1989.Google Scholar

[70] R. R., Muntz and J. C. S., Lui, Evaluating Bounds on Steady-State Availability of Repairable Systems from Markov Models, pages 435–454. Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1991.Google Scholar

[71] R. R., Muntz and J. C. S., Lui, Computing bounds on steady state availability of repairable computer systems, J. of Assoc. for Computing Machinery, 41(4):676–707, July 1994.Google Scholar

[72] R. R., Muntz and J. C. S., Lui, Bounding the response time of a minimum expected delay routing system, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 44(5):1371–1382, December 1995.Google Scholar

[73] J. K., Muppala and K. S., Trivedi, Numerical Transient Solution of Finite Markovian Queueing Systems, chapter 13, pages 262–284. Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar

[74] H., Nabli and B., Sericola, Performability analysis: a new algorithm, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-45:491–494, April 1996.Google Scholar

[75] H., Nabli and B., Sericola, Performability analysis for degradable computer systems, Comput. and Math. with Applicat., 39(3-4), 217–234, 2000.Google Scholar

[76] M. K., Nakayama, General conditions for bounded relative error in simulations of highly reliable Markovian systems, Advances in Appl. Probability, 28:687–727, 1996.Google Scholar

[77] V. F., Nicola, M. K., Nakayama, P., Heidelberger, and A., Goyal, Fast simulation of highly dependable systems with general failure and repair processes, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 42(12):1440–1452, December 1993.Google Scholar

[78] K. R., Pattipati, Y., Li, and H. A. P., Blom, A uniied framework for the preformability evaluation of fault-tolerant computer systems, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 42:312–326, March 1993.Google Scholar

[79] I. G., Petrovsky, Lectures on Partial Differential Equations. New York: Interscience Publishers, 1962.Google Scholar

[80] O., Pourret, The Slow-Fast Approximation for Markov Processes in Reliability (text in French). PhD thesis, University of Paris-Sud Orsay, 1998.Google Scholar

[81] J. G., Propp and D. B., Wilson, Coupling from the past, in D. A., Levin, Y., Peres, and E. L., Wilmer, Eds, Markov Chains and Mixing Times. Oxford: American Mathematical Society, 2008.Google Scholar

[82] M., Raynal and G., Rubino, An algorithm to detect token loss on a logical ring and to regenerate lost tokens, in Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Parallel Process. and Applicat., L'Aquila, Italy, 1987.Google Scholar

[83] C. P., Robert and G., Casella, Monte Carlo Statistical Methods (Springer Texts in Statistics). Secaucus, NJ, USA: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 2005.Google Scholar

[84] R. T., Rockafellar, Convex Analysis. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1970.Google Scholar

[85] S., Ross, Stochastic Processes, 2nd ed. Wiley, April 1996.Google Scholar

[86] G., Rubino, Network reliability evaluation, in K., Bagchi and J., Walrand, Eds, The State-of-the art in Performance Modeling and Simulation. Gordon and Breach Books, 1998.Google Scholar

[87] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Accumulated reward over the n first operational periods in fault-tolerant computing systems. Technical Report 1028, INRIA, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France, May 1989.Google Scholar

[88] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Distribution of operational times in fault-tolerant systems modeled by semi-Markov reward processes, in Proc. of the 12th Int. Conf. on Fault-Tolerant Systems and Diagnostics (FTSD'12), Prague, Czech Republic, September 1989.Google Scholar

[89] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, On weak lumpability in Markov chains, J. of Appl. Probability, 26:446–457, 1989.Google Scholar

[90] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Sojourn times in Markov processes, J. of Appl. Probability, 27:744–756, 1989.Google Scholar

[91] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, A inite characterization of weak lumpable Markov processes. Part I: The discrete time case, Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 38:195–204, 1991.Google Scholar

[92] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Successive operational periods as dependability measures, in A., Avizienis and J. C., Laprie, Eds, Dependable Computing and Fault-Tolerant Systems, Vol. 4, pages 239–254. Springer-Verlag, 1991. (Also presented in “1st International Conference on Dependable Computing for Critical Applications”, Santa Barbara, USA, August 1989.)Google Scholar

[93] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Interval availability analysis using operational periods, Performance Evaluation, 14(3-4):257–272, 1992.Google Scholar

[94] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, A inite characterization of weak lumpable Markov processes. Part II: The continuous time case, Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 45:115–125, 1993.Google Scholar

[95] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Interval availability distribution computation, in Proc. of the 23rd IEEE Int. Symp. on Fault Tolerant Computing (FTCS'23), Toulouse, France, June 1993.Google Scholar

[96] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Sojourn times in semi-Markov reward processes. Application to fault-tolerant systems modelling, Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety, 41, 1993.Google Scholar

[97] G., Rubino and B., Sericola, Interval availability analysis using denumerable Markov processes. Application to multiprocessor subject to breakdowns and repair, IEEE Trans. on Comput. (Special Issue on Fault-Tolerant Computing), 44(2), February 1995.Google Scholar

[98] G., Rubino and B., Tufin, Markovian models for dependability analysis, in G., Rubino and B., Tufin, Eds, Rare Event Simulation using Monte Carlo Methods, chapter 6, pages 125–144. Chichester: J. Wiley, 2009.Google Scholar

[99] G., Rubino and B., Tufin, Eds. Rare Event Simulation using Monte Carlo Methods. Chichester: J. Wiley, 2009.

[100] P., Semal, Refinable bounds for large Markov chains, IEEE Trans. on Comput., 44(10):1216–1222, October 1995.Google Scholar

[101] E., Seneta, Non-Negative Matrices and Markov Chains, Springer Verlag, 1981.Google Scholar

[102] B., Sericola, Closed-form solution for the distribution of the total time spent in a subset of states of a homogeneous Markov process during a inite observation period, J. of Appl. Probability, 27, 1990.Google Scholar

[103] B., Sericola, Interval availability of 2-states systems with exponential failures and phase-type repairs, IEEE Trans. on Rel., 43(2), June 1994.Google Scholar

[104] B., Sericola, Occupation times in Markov processes, Communications in Statistics – Stochastic Models, 16(5), 2000.Google Scholar

[105] B., Sericola, Markov Chains: Theory, Algorithms and Applications. Iste Series. Wiley, 2013.Google Scholar

[106] P., Shahabuddin, Importance sampling for the simulation of highly reliable Markovian systems, Management Science, 40(3):333–352, March 1994.Google Scholar

[107] T. J., Sheskin, A Markov partitioning algorithm for computing steady-state probabilities, Operations Research, 33(1):228–235, 1985.Google Scholar

[108] R. M., Smith, K. S., Trivedi, and A. V., Ramesh, Performability analysis: measures, an algorithm, and a case study, IEEE Trans. on Comput., C-37:406–417, April 1988.Google Scholar

[109] W. J., Stewart, Probability, Markov Chains, Queues and Simulation: The Mathematical Basis of Performance Modeling. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press, 2009.Google Scholar

[110] N. M., van Dijk, A simple bounding methodology for non-product form finite capacity queueing systems, in Proc. of the 1st Int. Workshop on Queueing Networks with Blocking, Raleigh, USA, May 1988.Google Scholar

[111] D., Williams, Probability with Martingales. Cambridge University Press, 1991.Google Scholar