Anomaly detection in heterogeneous media via saliency analysis of propagating wavefields

This work investigates the problem of anomaly detection by means of an agnostic inference strategy based on the concepts of spatial saliency and data sparsity. Specifically, it addresses the implementation and experimental validation aspects of a salient feature extraction methodology that was recently proposed for laser-based diagnostics and leverages the wavefield spatial reconstruction capability offered by scanning laser vibrometers. The methodology consists of two steps. The first is a spatiotemporal windowing strategy designed to partition the structural domain in small sub-domains and replicate impinging wave conditions at each location. The second is the construction of a low-rank-plus-outlier model of the regional data set using principal component analysis. Regions are labeled salient when their behavior does not belong to a common low-dimensional subspace that successfully describes the typical behavior of the anomaly-free portion of the surrounding medium. The most at tractive feature of this method is that it requires virtually no knowledge of the structural and material properties of the medium. This property makes it a powerful diagnostic tool for the inspection of media with pronounced heterogeneity or with unknown or unreliable material property distributions, e.g., as a result of severe material degradation over large portions of their domain.

[1]  Seth Stovack Kessler,et al.  Piezoelectric-based in-situ damage detection of composite materials for structural health monitoring systems , 2002 .

[2]  Christof Koch,et al.  A Model of Saliency-Based Visual Attention for Rapid Scene Analysis , 2009 .

[3]  Shuntao Liu,et al.  Damage localization using a power-efficient distributed on-board signal processing algorithm in a wireless sensor network , 2012 .

[4]  Jarvis D. Haupt,et al.  Automated defect localization via low rank plus outlier modeling of propagating wavefield data , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control.

[5]  Massimo Ruzzene,et al.  Frequency–wavenumber domain filtering for improved damage visualization , 2007 .

[6]  Lin Ye,et al.  Lamb wave-based quantitative identification of delamination in CF/EP composite structures using artificial neural algorithm , 2004 .

[7]  C. Koch,et al.  Computational modelling of visual attention , 2001, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[8]  C. Eckart,et al.  The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank , 1936 .

[9]  Antonia Papandreou-Suppappola,et al.  On the use of the matching pursuit decomposition signal processing technique for structural health monitoring , 2005, SPIE Smart Structures and Materials + Nondestructive Evaluation and Health Monitoring.

[10]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  Robust L/sub 1/ norm factorization in the presence of outliers and missing data by alternative convex programming , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[11]  Robert C. Bolles,et al.  Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography , 1981, CACM.

[12]  Nanning Zheng,et al.  Learning to Detect a Salient Object , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[13]  Bell Telephone,et al.  ROBUST ESTIMATES, RESIDUALS, AND OUTLIER DETECTION WITH MULTIRESPONSE DATA , 1972 .

[14]  P. Cawley,et al.  A two-dimensional Fourier transform method for the measurement of propagating multimode signals , 1991 .

[15]  A. Raghavan,et al.  Effects of Elevated Temperature on Guided-wave Structural Health Monitoring , 2008 .

[16]  Constantine Caramanis,et al.  Robust PCA via Outlier Pursuit , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[17]  Sridhar Krishnaswamy,et al.  Adaptive Fiber Bragg Grating Sensor Network for Structural Health Monitoring: Applications to Impact Monitoring , 2011 .

[18]  Paul D. Wilcox,et al.  Maximum-likelihood estimation of damage location in guided-wave structural health monitoring , 2011, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[19]  Stéphane Mallat,et al.  Matching pursuits with time-frequency dictionaries , 1993, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[20]  Christian Boller,et al.  Health Monitoring of Aerospace Structures , 2003 .

[21]  Wing Kong Chiu,et al.  Numerical analysis on the interaction of guided Lamb waves with a local elastic stiffness reduction in quasi-isotropic composite plate structures , 2004 .

[22]  Massimo Ruzzene,et al.  DAMAGE DETECTION IN PLATE STRUCTURES USING SPARSE ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER ARRAYS AND ACOUSTIC WAVEFIELD IMAGING , 2005 .

[23]  Joseph L. Rose,et al.  A Baseline and Vision of Ultrasonic Guided Wave Inspection Potential , 2002 .

[24]  Massimo Ruzzene,et al.  Frequency-wavenumber domain analysis of guided wavefields. , 2011, Ultrasonics.

[25]  A.N. Srivastava,et al.  Classification of Damage Signatures in Composite Plates using One-Class SVMs , 2007, 2007 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[26]  Michael J. Black,et al.  A Framework for Robust Subspace Learning , 2003, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[27]  A. Papandreou-Suppappola,et al.  Monte Carlo Matching Pursuit Decomposition Method for Damage Quantification in Composite Structures , 2009 .

[28]  Pablo A. Parrilo,et al.  Rank-Sparsity Incoherence for Matrix Decomposition , 2009, SIAM J. Optim..

[29]  Yi Ma,et al.  Robust principal component analysis? , 2009, JACM.

[30]  Jeong-Beom Ihn,et al.  Pitch-catch Active Sensing Methods in Structural Health Monitoring for Aircraft Structures , 2008 .

[31]  G. W. Stewart,et al.  On the Early History of the Singular Value Decomposition , 1993, SIAM Rev..

[32]  VARUN CHANDOLA,et al.  Anomaly detection: A survey , 2009, CSUR.

[33]  Jung-Min Park,et al.  An overview of anomaly detection techniques: Existing solutions and latest technological trends , 2007, Comput. Networks.