Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
162 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Stochastic stiffness identification and response estimation of Timoshenko beams via physics-informed Gaussian processes (2309.11875v1)

Published 21 Sep 2023 in cs.LG and cs.AI

Abstract: Machine learning models trained with structural health monitoring data have become a powerful tool for system identification. This paper presents a physics-informed Gaussian process (GP) model for Timoshenko beam elements. The model is constructed as a multi-output GP with covariance and cross-covariance kernels analytically derived based on the differential equations for deflections, rotations, strains, bending moments, shear forces and applied loads. Stiffness identification is performed in a Bayesian format by maximising a posterior model through a Markov chain Monte Carlo method, yielding a stochastic model for the structural parameters. The optimised GP model is further employed for probabilistic predictions of unobserved responses. Additionally, an entropy-based method for physics-informed sensor placement optimisation is presented, exploiting heterogeneous sensor position information and structural boundary conditions built into the GP model. Results demonstrate that the proposed approach is effective at identifying structural parameters and is capable of fusing data from heterogeneous and multi-fidelity sensors. Probabilistic predictions of structural responses and internal forces are in closer agreement with measured data. We validate our model with an experimental setup and discuss the quality and uncertainty of the obtained results. The proposed approach has potential applications in the field of structural health monitoring (SHM) for both mechanical and structural systems.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (58)
  1. A procedure to estimate the Minimum Observable Damage in truss structures using vibration-based Structural Health Monitoring systems. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 73:103451, 2023.
  2. Efficient model updating of a multi-story frame and its foundation stiffness from earthquake records using a timoshenko beam model. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 92:25–35, 2017.
  3. Model updating of a wind turbine blade finite element Timoshenko beam model with invertible neural networks. Wind Energy Science, 7(2):623–645, 2022.
  4. Parametric identification of Timoshenko-beam model for shear-wall structures using monitoring data. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 189:110100, 2023.
  5. Finite element model updating of a small scale bridge. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 268(5):993–1012, 2003.
  6. Estimation of input parameters in complex simulation using a Gaussian process metamodel. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 17(3):219–225, 2002.
  7. Damage identification by response surface based model updating using D-optimal design. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 25(2):717–733, 2011.
  8. Gaussian process regression constrained by boundary value problems. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 388:114117, 2022.
  9. A physics-informed deep learning framework for inversion and surrogate modeling in solid mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 379:113741, 2021.
  10. Physics-informed machine learning. Nat Rev Phys, 3(6):422–440, 2021.
  11. Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Heat Transfer Problems. Journal of Heat Transfer, 143(6), 2021.
  12. Physics informed neural networks for continuum micromechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 393:114790, 2022.
  13. Analyses of internal structures and defects in materials using physics-informed neural networks. Science Advances, 8(7):eabk0644, 2022.
  14. Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. Journal of Computational Physics, 378:686–707, 2019.
  15. Physics-informed neural networks for high-speed flows. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 360:112789, 2020.
  16. NSFnets (Navier-Stokes flow nets): Physics-informed neural networks for the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. Journal of Computational Physics, 426:109951, 2021.
  17. Physics-integrated deep learning for uncertainty quantification and reliability estimation of nonlinear dynamical systems. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 72:103419, 2023.
  18. Meshless physics-informed deep learning method for three-dimensional solid mechanics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 122(23):7182–7201, 2021.
  19. A framework based on physics-informed neural networks and extreme learning for the analysis of composite structures. Computers & Structures, 265:106761, 2022.
  20. Physics-informed neural networks for estimating stress transfer mechanics in single lap joints. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A, 22(8):621–631, 2021.
  21. Carl Edward Rasmussen and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning, volume 2 of 3. The MIT Press, 2006.
  22. Probabilistic reconstruction for spatiotemporal sensor data integrated with Gaussian process regression. Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, 69:103264, 2022.
  23. Multi-fidelity Gaussian process regression for prediction of random fields. Journal of Computational Physics, 336:36–50, 2017.
  24. The synthesis of data from instrumented structures and physics-based models via Gaussian processes. Journal of Computational Physics, 392:248–265, 2019.
  25. Extended Co-Kriging interpolation method based on multi-fidelity data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 323:120–131, 2018.
  26. Radford M. Neal. Priors for Infinite Networks. In Radford M. Neal, editor, Bayesian Learning for Neural Networks, Lecture Notes in Statistics, pages 29–53. Springer, New York, NY, 1996.
  27. Machine learning of linear differential equations using Gaussian processes. Journal of Computational Physics, 348:683–693, 2017.
  28. Linear Latent Force Models Using Gaussian Processes. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(11):2693–2705, 2013.
  29. Simo Särkkä. Linear Operators and Stochastic Partial Differential Equations in Gaussian Process Regression. In Timo Honkela, Włodzisław Duch, Mark Girolami, and Samuel Kaski, editors, Artificial Neural Networks and Machine Learning – ICANN 2011, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 151–158, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer.
  30. Hidden physics models: Machine learning of nonlinear partial differential equations. Journal of Computational Physics, 357:125–141, 2018.
  31. Physics-informed Gaussian process model for Euler-Bernoulli beam elements. In IABSE Symposium Prague, pages 445–452, 2022.
  32. T. J. Rogers and T. Friis. A latent restoring force approach to nonlinear system identification. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 180:109426, 2022.
  33. A Gaussian process latent force model for joint input-state estimation in linear structural systems. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 128:497–530, 2019.
  34. Data-driven aerodynamic analysis of structures using Gaussian Processes. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 222:104911, 2022.
  35. Weak Constraint Gaussian Processes for optimal sensor placement. Journal of Computational Science, 42:101110, 2020.
  36. Multi-objective optimization for sensor placement: An integrated combinatorial approach with reduced order model and Gaussian process. Measurement, 187:110370, 2022.
  37. Variational Gaussian Process for Optimal Sensor Placement. Appl Math, 66(2):287–317, 2021.
  38. Gaussian Process Online Learning With a Sparse Data Stream. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 5(4):5977–5984, 2020.
  39. Near-Optimal Sensor Placements in Gaussian Processes: Theory, Efficient Algorithms and Empirical Studies. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9:235–284, 2008.
  40. S.P. Timoshenko. LXVI. On the correction for shear of the differential equation for transverse vibrations of prismatic bars. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 41(245):744–746, 1921.
  41. G. Prathap. Locking in finite-element analysis—from superstition to science. Current Science, 61(12):813–819, 1991.
  42. G. Prathap. Towards a science of FEA: Patterns, predictability and proof through some case studies. Current Science, 77(10):1311–1318, 1999.
  43. Structure Discovery in Nonparametric Regression through Compositional Kernel Search. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 1166–1174. PMLR, 2013.
  44. Universal Kernels. J. Mach. Learn. Res., 7:2651–2667, 2006.
  45. Christopher J. Paciorek. Bayesian Smoothing with Gaussian Processes Using Fourier Basis Functions in the spectralGP Package. J Stat Softw, 19(2):22751, 2007.
  46. Noel Cressie. Statistics for Spatial Data. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
  47. Radford M. Neal. Monte Carlo Implementation of Gaussian Process Models for Bayesian Regression and Classification, 1997.
  48. Alan E. Gelfand. Gibbs Sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 95(452):1300–1304, 2000.
  49. W. K. Hastings. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika, 57(1):97–109, 1970.
  50. Approximate Inference for Fully Bayesian Gaussian Process Regression. In Proceedings of The 2nd Symposium on Advances in Approximate Bayesian Inference, pages 1–12. PMLR, 2020.
  51. An Exact Algorithm for Maximum Entropy Sampling. Operations Research, 43(4):684–691, 1995.
  52. A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code. Technometrics, 42(1):55–61, 2000.
  53. Entropy-Based Sensor Placement Optimization for Waterloss Detection in Water Distribution Networks. Water Resour Manage, 27(13):4443–4468, 2013.
  54. Maximum entropy sampling. Journal of Applied Statistics, 14(2):165–170, 1987.
  55. Local and global sparse Gaussian process approximations. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 524–531. PMLR, 2007.
  56. A Unifying View of Sparse Approximate Gaussian Process Regression. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6(65):1939–1959, 2005.
  57. Gaussian Processes for Big Data, 2013.
  58. An assessment framework for sensor-based detection of critical structural conditions with consideration of load uncertainty. Structures, 12:168–178, 2017.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now