Bayesian Learning for Earthquake EngineeringApplications and Structural Health Monitoring

Parallel to significant advances in sensor hardware, there have been recent developments of sophisticated methods for quantitative assessment of measured data that explicitly deal with all of the involved uncertainties, including inevitable measurement errors. The existence of these uncertainties often causes numerical instabilities in inverse problems that make them ill-conditioned. The Bayesian methodology is known to provide an efficient way to alleviate this illconditioning by incorporating the prior term for regularization of the inverse problem, and to provide probabilistic results which are meaningful for decision making. In this work, the Bayesian methodology is applied to inverse problems in earthquake engineering and especially to structural health monitoring. The proposed methodology of Bayesian learning using automatic relevance determination (ARD) prior, including its kernel version called the Relevance Vector Machine, is presented and applied to earthquake early warning, earthquake ground motion attenuation estimation, and structural health monitoring, using either a Bayesian classification or regression approach. The classification and regression are both performed in three phases: (1) Phase I (feature extraction phase): Determine which features from the data to use in a training dataset; (2) Phase II (training phase): Identify the unknown parameters defining a model by using a training dataset; and (3) Phase III (prediction phase): Predict the results based on the features from new data. This work focuses on the advantages of making probabilistic predictions obtained by Bayesian methods to deal with all uncertainties and the good characteristics of the proposed method in terms of computationally efficient training, and, especially, vi prediction that make it suitable for real-time operation. It is shown that sparseness (using only smaller number of basis function terms) is produced in the regression equations and classification separating boundary by using the ARD prior along with Bayesian model class selection to select the most probable (plausible) model class based on the data. This model class selection procedure automatically produces optimal regularization of the problem at hand, making it well-conditioned. Several applications of the proposed Bayesian learning methodology are presented. First, automatic near-source and far-source classification of incoming ground motion signals is treated and the Bayesian learning method is used to determine which ground motion features are optimal for this classification. Second, a probabilistic earthquake attenuation model for peak ground acceleration is identified using selected optimal features, especially taking a non-linearly involved parameter into consideration. It is shown that the Bayesian learning method can be utilized to estimate not only linear coefficients but also a non-linearly involved parameter to provide an estimate for an unknown parameter in the kernel basis functions for Relevance Vector Machine. Third, the proposed method is extended to a general case of regression problems with vector outputs and applied to structural health monitoring applications. It is concluded that the proposed vector output RVM shows promise for estimating damage locations and their severities from change of modal properties such as natural frequencies and mode shapes.

[1]  Angel R. Martinez,et al.  Computational Statistics Handbook with MATLAB , 2001 .

[2]  James L. Beck,et al.  Relevance Vector Machine Regression Applied to Structural Health Monitoring , 2007 .

[3]  Johan A. K. Suykens,et al.  Advances in learning theory : methods, models and applications , 2003 .

[4]  James L. Beck,et al.  Two-Stage Structural Health Monitoring Approach for Phase I Benchmark Studies , 2004 .

[5]  David M. Boore,et al.  Prediction of earthquake response spectra , 1982 .

[6]  李幼升,et al.  Ph , 1989 .

[7]  T. Iwata,et al.  Rupture Process of the 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey, Earthquake Estimated from Strong-Motion Waveforms , 2002 .

[8]  George Eastman House,et al.  Sparse Bayesian Learning and the Relevan e Ve tor Ma hine , 2001 .

[9]  C. Ji,et al.  Slip history and dynamic implications of the 1999 Chi‐Chi, Taiwan, earthquake , 2003 .

[10]  J. Beck,et al.  Model Selection using Response Measurements: Bayesian Probabilistic Approach , 2004 .

[11]  J. Beck,et al.  Updating Models and Their Uncertainties. I: Bayesian Statistical Framework , 1998 .

[12]  M. Tribus,et al.  Probability theory: the logic of science , 2003 .

[13]  W. B. Joyner,et al.  ESTIMATION OF RESPONSE SPECTRA AND PEAK ACCELERATIONS FROM WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN EARTHQUAKES: AN INTERIM REPORT PART 2 , 1993 .

[14]  Michael E. Tipping,et al.  Analysis of Sparse Bayesian Learning , 2001, NIPS.

[15]  Hoon Sohn,et al.  DAMAGE DIAGNOSIS USING EXPERIMENTAL RITZ VECTORS , 2001 .

[16]  Kenneth W. Campbell,et al.  Near-source attenuation of peak horizontal acceleration , 1981 .

[17]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  The Evidence Framework Applied to Classification Networks , 1992, Neural Computation.

[18]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[19]  C. W. Groetsch,et al.  The theory of Tikhonov regularization for Fredholm equations of the first kind , 1984 .

[20]  G. Cua Creating the virtual seismologist: Developments in ground motion characterization and seismic early warning , 2005 .

[21]  Michael E. Tipping,et al.  Fast Marginal Likelihood Maximisation for Sparse Bayesian Models , 2003 .

[22]  Erik A. Johnson,et al.  Phase I IASC-ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Benchmark Problem Using Simulated Data , 2004 .

[23]  D. Wald Slip History of the 1995 Kobe, Japan, Earthquake Determined from Strong Motion, Teleseismic, and Geodetic Data , 1996 .

[24]  D. Wald,et al.  Spatial and temporal distribution of slip for the 1992 Landers, California, earthquake , 1994, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[25]  Chen Ji,et al.  Broadband modeling of the 2002 Denali fault earthquake on the Earth Simulator , 2003 .

[26]  James L. Beck,et al.  Sparse Bayesian Learning for Structural Health Monitoring , 2006 .

[27]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  Inversion of strong ground motion and teleseismic waveform data for the fault rupture history of the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake , 1983 .

[28]  James L. Beck,et al.  Bayesian Updating and Model Class Selection for Hysteretic Structural Models Using Stochastic Simulation , 2008 .

[29]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Pattern Recognition and Neural Networks , 1995 .

[30]  Robert D. Adams,et al.  The location of defects in structures from measurements of natural frequencies , 1979 .

[31]  Matthew M. Muto,et al.  Application of Stochastic Simulation Methods to System Identification , 2007 .

[32]  David Mackay,et al.  Probable networks and plausible predictions - a review of practical Bayesian methods for supervised neural networks , 1995 .

[33]  H. Kanamori,et al.  The Potential for Earthquake Early Warning in Southern California , 2003, Science.

[34]  Vladimir Vapnik,et al.  Statistical learning theory , 1998 .

[35]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[36]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  Bayesian Interpolation , 1992, Neural Computation.

[37]  W. B. Joyner,et al.  Equations for Estimating Horizontal Response Spectra and Peak Acceleration from Western North American Earthquakes: A Summary of Recent Work , 1997 .

[38]  David C. Zimmerman,et al.  PROCEDURE TO EXTRACT RITZ VECTORS FROM DYNAMIC TESTING DATA , 1999 .

[39]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  Rupture model of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake from the inversion of strong-motion and broadband teleseismic data , 1991, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[40]  Thomas H. Heaton,et al.  The slip history of the 1994 Northridge, California, earthquake determined from strong-motion, teleseismic, GPS, and leveling data , 1996, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[41]  David Polidori,et al.  Determination of Modal Parameters from Ambient Vibration Data for Structural Health Monitoring , 1994 .

[42]  James L. Beck,et al.  Bayesian Analysis of the Phase II IASC–ASCE Structural Health Monitoring Experimental Benchmark Data , 2004 .

[43]  Michael E. Tipping Bayesian Inference: An Introduction to Principles and Practice in Machine Learning , 2003, Advanced Lectures on Machine Learning.

[44]  James L. Beck,et al.  Structural Health Monitoring via Measured Ritz Vectors Utilizing Artificial Neural Networks , 2006, Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastructure Eng..

[45]  J. Ching,et al.  Transitional Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method for Bayesian Model Updating, Model Class Selection, and Model Averaging , 2007 .

[46]  James L. Beck,et al.  System Identification Methods Applied to Measured Seismic Response , 1996 .

[47]  James L. Beck,et al.  A Bayesian probabilistic approach to structural health monitoring , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 American Control Conference (Cat. No. 99CH36251).

[48]  Achintya Haldar,et al.  Probability, Reliability and Statistical Methods in Engineering Design (Haldar, Mahadevan) , 1999 .

[49]  Chris H. Q. Ding,et al.  Multi-class protein fold recognition using support vector machines and neural networks , 2001, Bioinform..

[50]  David M. Boore,et al.  Peak horizontal acceleration and velocity from strong motion records including records from the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake , 1981 .

[51]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[52]  H. Lee,et al.  Determination of an optimal regularization factor in system identification with Tikhonov regularization for linear elastic continua , 2001 .

[53]  Michael E. Tipping The Relevance Vector Machine , 1999, NIPS.

[54]  Lambros S. Katafygiotis,et al.  A BENCHMARK PROBLEM FOR STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING AND DAMAGE DETECTION , 2000 .

[55]  N. L. Johnson,et al.  Multivariate Analysis , 1958, Nature.

[56]  B. Blackwell,et al.  Inverse Heat Conduction: Ill-Posed Problems , 1985 .

[57]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  BAYESIAN NON-LINEAR MODELING FOR THE PREDICTION COMPETITION , 1996 .

[58]  Ka-Veng Yuen,et al.  On the complexity of artificial neural networks for smart structures monitoring , 2006 .