Paper detail

Reliability is a new science: we are on the right way

Reliability has long been treated as an engineering practice supported by testing, statistics and standards, yet its status as a scientific discipline remains unsettled. From a philosophical perspective, scientific truth is characterized by a dual-structure that links empirical truth and mathematical truth, which requires an axiomatic system that is symbolically expressible and verifiable by universally repeatable controlled experiments. Building on this criterion, this paper examines whether reliability satisfies the dual-structure of scientific truth. Firstly, we analyze the philosophical foundations of the reliability problem, tracing its transition from experiential confidence and engineering practice toward scientific inquiry. Then, reliability science principles are introduced as an axiomatic system consisting of margin, degradation and uncertainty, which define reliability as the repeatability of system performance across time and space. Next, we present reliability science experiments as the empirical aspect of the dual-structure, where controlled and repeatable interventions are designed to verify the causal relations implied by the axioms. Furthermore, we develop the mathematical framework of reliability as the symbolic aspect of the dual-structure, articulating reliability laws through distance, relation and change, and developing a time-dependent measure, Biandong Statistics, to represent varying uncertainty beyond static descriptions. Accordingly, we argue that reliability is indeed a scientific discipline. The applicability of reliability science is demonstrated across engineering, living and social systems, and a unified logic for guiding engineering activities across the entire product lifecycle is provided, linking reliability to the conceptual, development, procurement, production and operation phases within a model-based structure.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.