Structural Damage Identification via Bayesian Inference with a New Hierarchical Modeling and Spike-and-Slab Prior
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X87212Keywords:
Bayesian Inference, Adaptive Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method, Spike-and-Slab PriorAbstract
The present work aims to formulate and solve the inverse problem of structural damage identification using Bayesian Inference. In the solution of the direct problem, the Finite Element Method (FEM) is considered. The modeling of the damage field is performed through the cohesion parameter, which continuously describes the integrity of the structure. The damage identification problem is formulated as an inverse parameter estimation problem, where the posterior probability distribution of the cohesion parameters is sampled using the Adaptive Markov Chain Monte Carlo method and a Spike-Slab prior, adopting a novel hierarchical modeling approach for the inverse problem and an appropriate prior distribution that naturally models the available information about the parameters of interest.
Downloads
References
Albani, R. A., Albani, V. L., Gomes, L. E. S., Migon, H. S., and Silva Neto, A. J. (2023).
Bayesian inference and wind field statistical modeling applied to multiple source estimation. Environmental Pollution, 321:121061.1–11.
Andersen, M. R., Vehtari, A., Winther, O., and Hansen, L. K. (2017). Bayesian inference for spatio-temporal spike-and-slab priors. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 18:1–58.
Hastings, W. K. (1970). Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov Chain and their applications. Biometrika, 57:97–109.
Hern´andez-Lobato, D., Hern´andez-Lobato, J. M., and Dupont, P. (2013). Generalized spike-and-slab priors for bayesian group feature selection using expectation propagation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 14:1891–1945.
Link, M. and Weiland, M. (2009). Damage identification by multi-model updating in the modal and in the time domain. Mech. Syst. Signal Process, 23:1734–1746.
Malakoff, D. M. (1999). Bayes offers “new” way to make sense of numbers. Science, 268:1460–1464.
Migon, H. S., Gamerman, D., and Louzada, F. (2014). Statistical Inference - An Integrated Approach, volume 1. FL: Chapman Hall, Boca Raton, 2 edition.
Mitchell, T. J. and Beauchamp, J. J. (1988). Bayesian variable selection in linear regression. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83:1023–1032.
Ozisik, M. N. and Orlande, H. R. B. (2021). Inverse Heat Transfer. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2 edition.
Pandey, A. K. and Biswas, M. (1994). Damage detection in structures using changes in flexibility. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 169(1):3–17.
Reddy, J. N. (1984). An Introduction to the Finite Element Method. McGraw-Hill.
Stutz, L. T., Castello, D. A., and Rochinha, F. A. (2005). A flexibility-based continuum damage identification approach. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 279:641–667.
Stutz, L. T., Rangel, I. C. S. S., Rangel, L. S., Corrˆea, R. A. P., and Knupp, D. C. (2018). Structural damage identification built on a response surface model and the flexibility matrix. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 434:284–297.
Taghizadeh, L., Karimi, A., Stadlbauer, B., Weninger, W. J., Kaniusas, E., and Heitzinger, C. (2020). Bayesian inversion for electrical-impedance tomography in medical imaging using the nonlinear poisson–boltzmann equation. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 365:112959.
Tanner, M. A. (1993). Tools for Statistical Inference. Springer Verlag, New York.
Teixeira, J. S., Stutz, L., Knupp, D. C., and Silva Neto, A. J. (2016). Structural damage identification via time domain response and Markov Chain Monte Carlo method. Inverse Problems in Science and Engineering, 25(6):909–935.
Teixeira, J. S., Stutz, L. T., Knupp, D. C., and Neto, A. J. S. (2020). A new adaptive approach of the metropolis-hastings algorithm applied to structural damage identification using time domain data. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 82:587–606.
V¨olkel, S. H., Kr¨uger, C. J., and Kokkotas, K. D. (2021). Bayesian inverse problem of rotating neutron stars. Physical Review D, 103:083008.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ciência e Natura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.