Finite Element Model Updating Using the Separable Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo Technique
|
|
- Herbert Perry
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Finite Element Model Updating Using the Separable Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo Technique I. Boulkaibet a, L. Mthembu a, T. Marwala a, M. I. Friswell b, S. Adhikari b a The Centre For Intelligent System Modelling (CISM), Electrical and Electronic Engineering Department, University of Johannesburg, PO Box 524, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa. b College of Engineering, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, United Kingdom. ABSTRACT The use of Bayesian techniques in Finite Element Model (FEM) updating has recently increased. These techniques have the ability to quantify and characterize the uncertainties of dynamic structures. In order to update a FEM, the Bayesian formulation requires the evaluation of the posterior distribution function. For large systems, this functions is either difficult (or not available) to solve in an analytical way. In such cases using sampling techniques can provide good approximations of the Bayesian posterior distribution function. The Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) method is a powerful sampling method for solving higher-dimensional complex problems. The HMC uses the molecular dynamics (MD) as a global Monte Carlo (MC) move to reach areas of high probability. However, the acceptance rate of HMC is sensitive to the system size as well as the time step used to evaluate MD trajectory. To overcome this, we propose the use of the Separable Shadow hybrid Monte Carlo (S2HMC) method. This method generates samples from a separable shadow Hamiltonian. The accuracy and the efficiency of this sampling method is tested on the updating of a GARTEUR SM-AG19 structure. Keywords: Bayesian, Sampling, Finite Element Model updating, Markov Chain Monte Carlo, Hybrid Monte Carlo method, Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo. 1. Introduction Finite element model (FEM) is a numerical method used to model complex engineering problems [1, 2]. FEM is often used to compute displacements, stresses and strains in complex structures under a given set of loads. Due to the uncertainties (among other approximations) associated with the process of constructing a finite element model of a structure the analytical results are different from those obtained from experimental measurements [3, 4]. Thus for practical purposes the FE model needs to be updated. In recent years the use of the Bayesian framework to build model updating techniques has shown promising results in this system identification problem [4, 6, 7, 8]. This approach allows system modelling uncertainties to be expressed in terms of probability. This can be done by representing the parameters that need to be updated as random vectors with a joint probability distribution function (pdf). This distribution function is known as the posterior distribution function. For sufficiently complex problems this pdf is not available in analytical form. This is the case for the FEM updating problem where the parameter search space is non linear and of high dimension. When an analytical solution is not available sampling methods, such as the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC), offer the only practical solution to estimating the desired posterior distribution function [4, 7, 8]. One improvement on the classic MCMC is the Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) sampling technique. This algorithm is able to deal with an updating vector of a large size. In the HMC the derivative of the target log-density probability is used to guide the Monte Carlo trajectory and leads towards areas of high probability [5, 7, 13, 25]. An auxiliary variable, called the momentum vector is introduced and the updated vector is treated as a system displacement. The total system energy called the Hamiltonian function- is evaluated using the Störmer-Verlet (also called leapfrog) algorithm. The leapfrog algorithm requires the log-density derivative, which can be seen as a guide used to deliver global moves with a
2 higher acceptance probability. The Hamiltonian function is numerically evaluated using the popular Störmer- Verlet integrator [25]. This integrator does not conserve the energy especially when the time step used by the leapfrog algorithm or/and the system size is considered large. To overcome this limitation an algorithm called the Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo (SHMC) has been proposed [9, 23]. The SHMC uses a modified Hamiltonian function for sampling and a reweighting to improve the acceptance rate of HMC [9, 23].However the SHMC uses a non-separable Hamiltonian which generates the momenta in a computationally expensive way. Furthermore this method requires an extra tuning parameter to balance the cost of rejection of momenta and positions [9, 23, 24]. In this paper the Separable Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo (S2HMC) [24] is implemented. The S2HMC is able to sample the posterior distribution function of FEM updating parameters by using a separable shadow Hamiltonian function and without involving any extra parameters. This method is tested on updating a GARTEUR SM-AG19 aeroplane structure. The efficiency, reliability and limitations of the S2HMC technique are investigated when a Bayesian approach is implemented on an FEM updating problem. In the next section, the finite element model background is presented. In Section 3, an introduction to the Bayesian framework is introduced where the posterior distribution of the uncertain parameters of the FEM is presented. Section 4 introduces the HMC techniques. Section 5 introduces the Shadow Hamiltonian function. Section 6 introduces the S2HMC technique which is used to predict the posterior distribution. Section 8 presents an implementation on a GARTEUR SM-AG19 aeroplane structure. Finally, the Section 9 concludes the paper. 2 Finite Element Model Background In finite element modelling, an N degree of freedom dynamic structure can be described by the second order equation of motion [8, 14, 23]: ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) where and are the mass, damping and stiffness matrices of size, ( ) is the vector of N degrees of freedom and ( ) is the vector of loads applied to the structure. In the case that no external forces are applied to the structure and if the damping terms are neglected ( ), the dynamic equation may be written in the modal domain (natural frequencies and mode shapes) : [ ( ) ] (2) is the measured natural frequency, is the measured mode shape vector and is the error vector. In Eq. (2), the error vector is equal to if the system matrices and correspond to the modal properties ( and ). However, is a non-zero vector if the system matrices obtained analytically from the finite element model do not match the measured modal properties and. 3 Bayesian Inferences In this work the Bayesian method is used to solve the FEM updating problem in the modal domain. Bayesian approaches are governed by Bayes rule [4, 5, 8, 23]: ( ) ( ) ( ) (3) where represent the vector of updating parameters and the mass and stiffness matrices are functions of the updating parameters. The quantity ( ), known as the prior probability distribution, is a function of the updating parameters in the absence of the data. is the measured modal properties; the natural frequencies and mode shapes. The quantity ( ) is the posterior probability distribution function of the parameters in the presence of the data. ( ) is the likelihood probability distribution function [4,5,17]. The likelihood distribution can be seen as the probability of the modal measurements in the presence of uncertain parameters [8]. This function can be defined as the normalized exponent of the error function that represents the differences between the measured and the analytic frequencies.
3 It can be written as: ( ) ( ) ( ( ) ) (4) where is a constant, is the number of measured modes and is the analytical frequency. The prior density function represents the prior knowledge about the updating parameters and quantifies the uncertainty of the parameters [8]. This knowledge can be facts like some parameters need to be updated more intensely than others. For example in structural systems parameters next to joints should be updated more intensely than for those corresponding to smooth surface areas far from joints. Here the prior probability distribution function for parameters is assumed to be Gaussian and is given by [17, 18, 23] : ( ) ( ) ( ) (5) where is the number of groups of parameters to be updated, and is the coefficient of the prior density function for the group of updating parameters. The notation denotes the Euclidean norm of. In Eq. (5), if is constant for all of the updating parameters then the updated parameters will be of the same order of magnitude. Eq. (5) is chosen to be Gaussian because many natural processes tend to have a Gaussian distribution. The posterior distribution function of the parameters given the observed data is denoted as ( ) and is obtained by applying Bayes theorem as represented in Eq. (3). The distribution ( ) is calculated by substituting Eq. (4) and (5) into Eq. (3) to give ( ) ( ) ( ( ) ) (6) where ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) In FEM updating the analytical form of the posterior distribution function solution is not available. As discussed sampling techniques simplify the Bayesian inference by providing a set of random samples from posterior distribution [5, 7, 8, 17, 20]. In the case that is the observation of certain parameters at different discrete time instants the total Probability theorem provides probabilistic information for the prediction of the future responses at different time instants. Consider the following integral: ( ) ( ) ( ) [ ] (8) Eq. (8) depends on the posterior distribution function. The dimension of the updating parameters makes it very difficult to obtain an analytical solution. Therefore, sampling techniques, such as Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods are employed to predict the updating parameter distribution and subsequently to predict the modal properties. Given a set of random parameter vector drawn from ( ), the expectation value of any observed function can be easily estimated. The integral in Eq. (8) can be solved using sampling algorithms [5, 7, 12, 13]. These algorithms are used to generate a sequence of vectors { } where is the number of samples and these vectors can be used to form a Markov chain. This generated vector is then used to predict the form of the posterior distribution function ( ). The integral in Eq. (8) can be approximated as ( ) (9) where is a function that depends on the updated parameters. As an example, if then becomes the expected value of. Generally, is the vector that contains the modal properties and is the number of retained states. In this paper, the SHMC method is used to sample from the posterior distribution function.
4 4 The Hybrid Monte Carlo Method The Hybrid Monte Carlo method, also known as the Hamiltonian Markov Chain method, is a sampling method for solving higher-dimensional complex problems [5, 7, 13, 23, 25]. The HMC combines a Molecular Dynamic (MD) trajectory with a Monte Carlo (MC) rejection step [8, 17]. In HMC, a dynamical system is considered in which auxiliary variables, called momentum are introduced. The updated parameters in the posterior distribution are treated as displacements. The total energy (Hamiltonian function) of the new dynamical system is defined by ( ) ( ) ( ), where the potential energy is ( ) ( ( )) and the kinetic energy is ( ). The kinetic energy depends only on and some chosen positive definite matrix. The joint distribution derived from the Hamiltonian function can be written in the following form: ( ) ( ( )) where is normalization constant. It is easy to see that ( ) can be written as ( ) ( ( ) ( ( )) or ( ) ( ) ( ). Sampling from the posterior distribution can be obtained by sampling ( ) from the joint distribution ( ). Also, the vectors and are independent according to ( ). The evolution of ( ) through time and time step is given by the following Störmer-Verlet algorithm [7, 8] ( ) ( ) [ ( )] (10) ( ) ( ) ( ) (11) ( ) ( ) [ ( )] (12) where is obtained numerically by finite difference as ( ) ( ) (13) [ ] is the perturbation vector and is a scalar which dictates the size of the perturbation of. After each iteration of Eqs. (10) - (12), the resulting candidate state is accepted or rejected according to the Metropolis criterion based on the value of the Hamiltonian ( ). Thus if ( ) is the initial state and ( ) is the state after the above equations have been updated then this candidate state is accepted with probability ( { ( ) ( )}). The obtained vector will be used for the next iteration and the algorithm stopping criterion is defined by the number of samples ( ). Theoretically, these moves preserve the total energy ( ) where the value of the total energy is constant. This can make the acceptance rate since the term { ( ) ( )}. However, the Hamiltonian dynamics is a discretised problem where the Störmer-Verlet is used to evaluate the pair ( ) through time. This integrator does not achieve the exact energy conservation. In this case, the time step needs to be small enough to reduce the error caused by the Störmer-Verlet integrator. The HMC algorithm can be summarized as follows: 1) An initial value is used to initiate the algorithm. 2) Initiate such that ( ) 3) Initiate the leapfrog algorithm with ( ) and run the algorithm for time steps to obtain ( ) 4) Update the FEM to obtain the new analytic frequencies and then compute ( ). 5) Accept ( ) with probability ( { ( ) ( )}). 6) Repeat steps (3-5) to get samples. 5. The Separable Shadow Hamiltonian function The S2HMC improves the sampling by changing the configuration spaces. This accelerates the convergence of averages computed with the method [24]. As a result the S2HMC improves the acceptance rate of HMC at a comparatively negligible computational cost. The S2HMC uses a processed velocity Verlet (VV) integrator instead of Verlet. The goal of a processing integrator is to increase the effective order of accuracy by using preprocessing and post-processing steps [24].
5 The rationale for increasing the effective order of accuracy is that a more accurate integrator has better acceptance rate in HMC. The S2HMC also uses a modified potential energy function, which is conserved to ( ) by the processed method instead of just ( ) by the unprocessed method. Moreover the S2HMC requires a reweighting step to compensate for modification of the potential energy. The shadow Hamiltonian function used in S2HMC is separable and fourth order [24]: ( ) ( ) ( ) (14) is the derivative of the potential energy with respect to. The modified or shadow Hamiltonian is a result of applying backward error analysis to numerical integrators [24]. In the analysis of numerical integrators for Hamiltonian systems, the shadow Hamiltonian has quantities that are better conserved than the true Hamiltonian. In particular, a fourth order shadow Hamiltonian is conserved within ( ) where is the discretization time step. For symplectic integrators one can construct shadow Hamiltonians of arbitrarily high order. The pre-processing step is given by: ( ( ) ( )) (15) ( ( ) ( )) (16) Equations (15) and (16) require an iterative solution for and a direct computation for. The post-processing step is given by: ( ( ) ( )) (17) ( ( ) ( )) (18) Equations (17) and (18) require an iterative solution for and a direct computation for. Finally, in order to calculate balanced values of the mean, the results must be reweighted. The average of an observable is giving by [24]:, where ( ( )) ( ( )) (19) The S2HMC algorithm can be summarized as follows [24]: 1) An initial value is used to initiate the algorithm. 2) Initiate such that ( ). 3) Compute the initial shadow energy ( ) using Eq. (14). 4) Pre-processing: Starting from ( ), solve iteratively for and a directly compute using Eqs. (15) and (16). 5) Initiate the leapfrog algorithm with ( ) and run the algorithm for time steps to obtain ( ) 6) Post-processing: Starting from ( ), solve iteratively for and a directly compute using Eqs. (17) and (18). 7) Update the FEM to obtain the new analytic frequencies and then compute ( ). 8) Accept ( ) with probability ( { ( ) ( )}). 9) Repeat steps (3-5) to get samples. 10) Compute weight: To compute the averages of a quantity ( ) using the S2HMC, reweighting of the sequence of is needed (Eq. 19).
6 The Modelled Structure and FE model All the finite element modeling was simulated using version 6.2 of the Structural Dynamics Toolbox (SDT ) under the MATLAB environment. In this paper, a GARTEUR SM-AG19 aeroplane structure is used to investigate the optimization capability of the four algorithms. The GARTEUR SM-AG19 structure was used as a benchmark study by 12 members of the GARTEUR Structures and Materials Action Group 19 [26, 27, 28, 29, 30]. One of the aims of the study was to compare the S2HMC and HMC methods with different time steps [23]. The benchmark study also allowed participants to test a single representative structure using their own test equipment. The experimental test data used in our analysis is data obtained from DLR Data, Göttingen, Germany. The above aeroplane has a length of 1.5 m and a width of 3m. The depth of the fuselage is 15cm with a thickness of 5cm. Figure 1 shows the FE model of the aeroplane. In our models all element materials are considered standard isotropic. The model elements are Euler Bernoulli beam elements. The measured natural frequency (Hz) data is: 6.38, 16.10, 33.13, 33.53, 35.65, 48.38, 49.43, 55.08, 63.04, Hz. Figure 1 FEM Garteur Structure The parameters to be updated are the right wing stiffnesses ( ), the left wing stiffnesses ( ), vertical tail statiffness ( ) and the overall structure s density( ). The constant of the posterior distribution is set equal 100, and all coefficients are set equal to, where is the variance of the parameter. The vector of is defined as [ ]. The initial position vector =[, ] and its bounds are given in Tables 1 and 2 where - Vertical Tail Plane, -Right and - Left. The time step is and the number of samples is. Table 1 The parameter vector and the mean values Parameter Parameter ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
7 Table 2 The Max/Min bounds of the updated vector Max_ position Min_ position Table 3 presents the initial value (the mean material or geometric value) of the update vector, as well as the updated values obtained by HMC and S2HMC methods for two different time step scenarios ( and ). In the first scenario ( ), the updated parameters obtained by the S2HMC algorithm are closer to the mean values i.e. they are physically realistic. There is a noticeable difference between the final updated values obtained by the HMC and S2HMC. The time step used for simulations in both methods,, provides a very good acceptance sampling rate - - for both methods. In the second scenario ( ) the updated parameters using the S2HMC method are much closer to the mean value. The reason is that the time step is large enough to allow significant jumps of the algorithm during the searching process. This also will lead to better results (see Table 4). In this setting the HMC method gives poor updating parameters (the same initial values) not shown in Table 3. This can be explained because the time step does not conserve the Hamiltonian function. This time step causes significant numerical errors of the integrator used (VV). In this case, the Hamiltonian function decreases with time which causes a sudden decrease of the acceptance rate (the acceptance rate decreases to less than 1% when the time step is ). The acceptance rate for the S2HMC is 71%, which is an acceptable rate compared to that for the HMC method. Table 3 Initial and updated parameter values Initial E Method Method Method Table 4 shows the modal results and output errors for the different sampling algorithms. The results show that the updated FEM natural frequencies are better than the initial FEM for all methods. The S2HMC provides a smaller final sum error compared to the HMC for both time steps. In the case, the error between the first measured natural frequency and that of the initial model is 10.47%. With the HMC method this error is reduced to 3.84% and by implementing the S2HMC it was further reduced to 3.73%. A similar observation can be made for the fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and ninth natural frequencies. The total initial error was % but after using the HMC and S2HMC methods it reduce to % and 15.00% respectively. Both methods converge fast and they almost have the same convergence rate (the algorithms start converging in the first iterations).
8 Changing the time step for both methods gives different results. In the case where the time step is increased ( ), the S2HMC method improves the most. This can be seen in Table 4 where the total error is reduced to % with an acceptance rate of 71%. However, this is not the case for HMC where the acceptance rate decreases to less than 1%. Using this time step, the updated vector obtained from the HMC does not improve the FEM results. Table 4 Modal results and errors for S2HMC and HMC at two different time steps. Mode Measured Frequency (Hz) Initial FEM Frequencies (Hz) Error (%) Frequencies HMC Method (Hz) Error (%) Frequencies S2HMC Method (Hz) Error (%) Frequencies S2HMC Method (Hz) Error (%) Total errors The time step,, provides a good acceptance sampling rate for both methods: HMC and S2HMC ( ). Choosing a different time step may reduce the acceptance sampling rate for the HMC method which can significantly affect the results obtained as well as the convergence rate. At the same time, it may provide a good convergence rate for the S2HMC method since the S2HMC provides samples when the time step is large. Fig. 2 shows the acceptance rate when the time step varies between to. The acceptance rate for both methods is 99.9% when the time step is. The acceptance rate starts decreasing when the time step increases for both methods but this decrease is faster and more significant in the case of the HMC method. When the time step, the acceptance rate for the HMC method decreases slightly to 98.7% and stays the same for the S2HMC methods (99.9%). When the time step used is, the S2HMC acceptance rate reduces slightly to 97.8%. However, it reduces significantly to 53.2% in the case of the HMC method. Finally, when the time step reaches, the S2HMC acceptance rate reduces to 71.3% which is an acceptable rate comparing to that obtained by the HMC method (less than 1%). Figure 2: The acceptance rate obtained for different time steps using HMC and S2HMC methods.
9 9. Conclusion In this paper Bayesian FEM methods are used to update a GARTEUR SM-AG19 aeroplane structure. To evaluate the posterior distribution function, two Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling techniques have been implemented; the Separable Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo method (S2HMC) and the Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) technique. In the simulation the S2HMC method gave better results than HMC for both implementations when the time step is equal to and. Moreover, the S2HMC method is more efficient than the HMC method where it provides samples with a large step time which is not the case with the HMC method. The sampling rate for the HMC method significantly decreases when the time step increases. Also, a large time step provides better results when the S2HMC method is used to update an FEM. 10. References [1] Onãte E.: Structural Analysis with the Finite Element Method. Linear Statics, Vol. 1: Basis and Solids, Springer [2] Rao S. S: The Finite Element Method in Engineering, 4th ed., Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, Burlington, [3] Friswell, M. I. and Mottershead, J.E.: Finite Element Model Updating in Structural Dynamics, Kluwer, Academic Publishers, [4] Marwala. T.: Finite Element Model Updating Using Computational Intelligence Techniques, Springer Verlag, London, UK, [5] Bishop C.M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer-Verlag, New York, [6] Yuen K.V.: Bayesian Methods for Structural Dynamics and Civil Engineering, Wiley, New York, [7] Cheung, S.H. and Beck, J.L.: (2009). Bayesian Model Updating Using Hybrid Monte Carlo Simulation with Application to Structural Dynamic Models with Many Uncertain Parameters, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 135(4), , [8] Boulkaibet I., Marwala T., Mthembu L., Friswell M. I. and Adhikari S.: Sampling Techniques in Bayesian Finite Element Model Updating, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 29 pp , [9] Izaguirre J. A., Hampton S. S. and Comput J.: Shadow hybrid Monte Carlo: an efficient propagator in phase space of macromolecules Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 200, pp , [10] Skeel R.D. and Hardy D.J.: Practical construction of modified Hamiltonians, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. Vol. 23, No 4, (2001) [11] Engle R. D., Skeel R. D. and Drees M.: Monitoring energy drift with shadow Hamiltonians, Journal of Computational Physics, Vol. 206, pp , [12] Neal R.M.: Slice Sampling, Technical Report, No. 2005, Department of Statistics, University of Toronto, [13] Hanson K. M.: Markov Chain Monte Carlo posterior sampling with the Hamiltonian Method, Proc. SPIE 4322, pp , [14] Ewins. D. J.: Modal Testing: Theory and Practice. Research Studies Press, Letchworth, [15] Guyan R.J.: Reduction of Stiffness and Mass Matrices, Am. Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut, Vol. 11(5), pp , [16] Kraaij C.S.: Model updating of a clamped -free beam system using FEMTOOLS, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, January, [17] Marwala T. and Sibisi S.: Finite element model updating using Bayesian approach. In Proceedings of the International Modal Analysis Conference, Orlando, Florida, USA, ISBN: [18] Bishop C.M.: Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition, Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford, [19] Vapnik V. N.: The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory, Springer Verlag, New York, [20] Ching J. and Leu S. S.: Bayesian Updating of Reliability of Civil Infrastructure Facilities Based on Condition-State Data and Fault-Tree Model, Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 94, Issue 12, pp , December [21] Creutz M.: Global Monte Carlo algorithms for many-fermion systems, Physics Review D 38, Vol. D 38, pp , [22] Kennedy A.D. and Pendleton B.: Acceptances and autocorrelations in hybrid Monte Carlo, Nuclear Physics B Proceedings Supplements, Vol. 20, pp , 1991.
10 [32] Boulkaibet I., Mthembu L., Marwala T., Friswell M. I. and Adhikari S.: Finite Element Model Updating Using the Shadow Hybrid Monte Carlo Technique, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series 2013, Vol. 6 pp [32] Sweet C. R., Hampton S. S., Skeel R. D., and Izaguirre J. A.: A separable shadow Hamiltonian hybrid Monte Carlo method, the Journal of Chemical Physic, Vol 131, Issue 17, [32] Beskos A., Pillai N. S., Roberts G. O., Sanz-Serna J. M., Stuart A. M.: Optimal tuning of the Hybrid Monte-Carlo Algorithm, Bernoulli Journal, December [26] Carvallo J., Datta B.N., Gupta A., Lagadapati M.: A direct method for model updating with incomplete measured data and without spurious modes, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 21 (7) [27] Datta B.N.: Finite element model updating, eigenstructure assignment and eigenvalue embedding techniques for vibrating systems, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 16 (2002), [28] Guyon I., Elisseeff A.: An introduction to variable and feature selection, Journal of Machine Learning Research 3 (2003), [29] Link M., Friswell M.I.: Generation of validated structural dynamic models - Results of a benchmark study utilizing the GARTEUR SM-AG19 Testbed, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, COST Action Special Issue, 17(1) January 2003, [30] Mthembu L.: Finite element Model updating, PhD thesis, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment, University of the Witwatersrand, 2012.
1330. Comparative study of model updating methods using frequency response function data
1330. Comparative study of model updating methods using frequency response function data Dong Jiang 1, Peng Zhang 2, Qingguo Fei 3, Shaoqing Wu 4 Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Engineering Mechanics, Nanjing,
More informationBayesian Methods for Machine Learning
Bayesian Methods for Machine Learning CS 584: Big Data Analytics Material adapted from Radford Neal s tutorial (http://ftp.cs.utoronto.ca/pub/radford/bayes-tut.pdf), Zoubin Ghahramni (http://hunch.net/~coms-4771/zoubin_ghahramani_bayesian_learning.pdf),
More informationProbabilistic Graphical Models Lecture 17: Markov chain Monte Carlo
Probabilistic Graphical Models Lecture 17: Markov chain Monte Carlo Andrew Gordon Wilson www.cs.cmu.edu/~andrewgw Carnegie Mellon University March 18, 2015 1 / 45 Resources and Attribution Image credits,
More informationDynamic System Identification using HDMR-Bayesian Technique
Dynamic System Identification using HDMR-Bayesian Technique *Shereena O A 1) and Dr. B N Rao 2) 1), 2) Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Madras, Chennai 600036, Tamil Nadu, India 1) ce14d020@smail.iitm.ac.in
More informationStructural Dynamic Modification Studies Using Updated Finite Element Model
Structural Dynamic Modification Studies Using Updated Finite Element Model Gupta A. K., Nakra B. C. 1 and Kundra T. K. 2 IRDE Dehradun 1 NSIT New Delhi 2 Deptt. of Mechanical Engg. IIT New Delhi ABSTRACT.
More informationThe Bias-Variance dilemma of the Monte Carlo. method. Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Technion City, Haifa 32000, Israel
The Bias-Variance dilemma of the Monte Carlo method Zlochin Mark 1 and Yoram Baram 1 Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Technion City, Haifa 32000, Israel fzmark,baramg@cs.technion.ac.il Abstract.
More informationGSHMC: An efficient Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling method. Sebastian Reich in collaboration with Elena Akhmatskaya (Fujitsu Laboratories Europe)
GSHMC: An efficient Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling method Sebastian Reich in collaboration with Elena Akhmatskaya (Fujitsu Laboratories Europe) 1. Motivation In the first lecture, we started from a
More informationPattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Bishop Chapter 11: Sampling Methods
Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning Chapter 11: Sampling Methods Elise Arnaud Jakob Verbeek May 22, 2008 Outline of the chapter 11.1 Basic Sampling Algorithms 11.2 Markov Chain Monte Carlo 11.3 Gibbs
More informationProbing the covariance matrix
Probing the covariance matrix Kenneth M. Hanson Los Alamos National Laboratory (ret.) BIE Users Group Meeting, September 24, 2013 This presentation available at http://kmh-lanl.hansonhub.com/ LA-UR-06-5241
More informationHierarchical sparse Bayesian learning for structural health monitoring. with incomplete modal data
Hierarchical sparse Bayesian learning for structural health monitoring with incomplete modal data Yong Huang and James L. Beck* Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology,
More informationBayesian Networks. instructor: Matteo Pozzi. x 1. x 2. x 3 x 4. x 5. x 6. x 7. x 8. x 9. Lec : Urban Systems Modeling
12735: Urban Systems Modeling Lec. 09 Bayesian Networks instructor: Matteo Pozzi x 1 x 2 x 3 x 4 x 5 x 6 x 7 x 8 x 9 1 outline example of applications how to shape a problem as a BN complexity of the inference
More informationReliable Condition Assessment of Structures Using Uncertain or Limited Field Modal Data
Reliable Condition Assessment of Structures Using Uncertain or Limited Field Modal Data Mojtaba Dirbaz Mehdi Modares Jamshid Mohammadi 6 th International Workshop on Reliable Engineering Computing 1 Motivation
More informationA Probabilistic Framework for solving Inverse Problems. Lambros S. Katafygiotis, Ph.D.
A Probabilistic Framework for solving Inverse Problems Lambros S. Katafygiotis, Ph.D. OUTLINE Introduction to basic concepts of Bayesian Statistics Inverse Problems in Civil Engineering Probabilistic Model
More informationDevelopment of Stochastic Artificial Neural Networks for Hydrological Prediction
Development of Stochastic Artificial Neural Networks for Hydrological Prediction G. B. Kingston, M. F. Lambert and H. R. Maier Centre for Applied Modelling in Water Engineering, School of Civil and Environmental
More informationKernel adaptive Sequential Monte Carlo
Kernel adaptive Sequential Monte Carlo Ingmar Schuster (Paris Dauphine) Heiko Strathmann (University College London) Brooks Paige (Oxford) Dino Sejdinovic (Oxford) December 7, 2015 1 / 36 Section 1 Outline
More informationADAPTIVE TWO-STAGE INTEGRATORS FOR SAMPLING ALGORITHMS BASED ON HAMILTONIAN DYNAMICS
ADAPTIVE TWO-STAGE INTEGRATORS FOR SAMPLING ALGORITHMS BASED ON HAMILTONIAN DYNAMICS E. Akhmatskaya a,c, M. Fernández-Pendás a, T. Radivojević a, J. M. Sanz-Serna b a Basque Center for Applied Mathematics
More informationA Statistical Input Pruning Method for Artificial Neural Networks Used in Environmental Modelling
A Statistical Input Pruning Method for Artificial Neural Networks Used in Environmental Modelling G. B. Kingston, H. R. Maier and M. F. Lambert Centre for Applied Modelling in Water Engineering, School
More informationReduction of Random Variables in Structural Reliability Analysis
Reduction of Random Variables in Structural Reliability Analysis S. Adhikari and R. S. Langley Department of Engineering University of Cambridge Trumpington Street Cambridge CB2 1PZ (U.K.) February 21,
More informationComparison study of the computational methods for eigenvalues IFE analysis
Applied and Computational Mechanics 2 (2008) 157 166 Comparison study of the computational methods for eigenvalues IFE analysis M. Vaško a,,m.sága a,m.handrik a a Department of Applied Mechanics, Faculty
More informationLarge Scale Bayesian Inference
Large Scale Bayesian I in Cosmology Jens Jasche Garching, 11 September 2012 Introduction Cosmography 3D density and velocity fields Power-spectra, bi-spectra Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Gravity Cosmological
More informationHamiltonian Monte Carlo
Chapter 7 Hamiltonian Monte Carlo As with the Metropolis Hastings algorithm, Hamiltonian (or hybrid) Monte Carlo (HMC) is an idea that has been knocking around in the physics literature since the 1980s
More informationUse of probability gradients in hybrid MCMC and a new convergence test
Use of probability gradients in hybrid MCMC and a new convergence test Ken Hanson Methods for Advanced Scientific Simulations Group This presentation available under http://www.lanl.gov/home/kmh/ June
More informationReminder of some Markov Chain properties:
Reminder of some Markov Chain properties: 1. a transition from one state to another occurs probabilistically 2. only state that matters is where you currently are (i.e. given present, future is independent
More informationBayesian room-acoustic modal analysis
Bayesian room-acoustic modal analysis Wesley Henderson a) Jonathan Botts b) Ning Xiang c) Graduate Program in Architectural Acoustics, School of Architecture, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New
More information27 : Distributed Monte Carlo Markov Chain. 1 Recap of MCMC and Naive Parallel Gibbs Sampling
10-708: Probabilistic Graphical Models 10-708, Spring 2014 27 : Distributed Monte Carlo Markov Chain Lecturer: Eric P. Xing Scribes: Pengtao Xie, Khoa Luu In this scribe, we are going to review the Parallel
More informationEfficiency and Reliability of Bayesian Calibration of Energy Supply System Models
Efficiency and Reliability of Bayesian Calibration of Energy Supply System Models Kathrin Menberg 1,2, Yeonsook Heo 2, Ruchi Choudhary 1 1 University of Cambridge, Department of Engineering, Cambridge,
More informationCSC 2541: Bayesian Methods for Machine Learning
CSC 2541: Bayesian Methods for Machine Learning Radford M. Neal, University of Toronto, 2011 Lecture 3 More Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods The Metropolis algorithm isn t the only way to do MCMC. We ll
More informationRisk Estimation and Uncertainty Quantification by Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods
Risk Estimation and Uncertainty Quantification by Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods Konstantin Zuev Institute for Risk and Uncertainty University of Liverpool http://www.liv.ac.uk/risk-and-uncertainty/staff/k-zuev/
More informationResearch on the iterative method for model updating based on the frequency response function
Acta Mech. Sin. 2012) 282):450 457 DOI 10.1007/s10409-012-0063-1 RESEARCH PAPER Research on the iterative method for model updating based on the frequency response function Wei-Ming Li Jia-Zhen Hong Received:
More informationAn Efficient Computational Solution Scheme of the Random Eigenvalue Problems
50th AIAA SDM Conference, 4-7 May 2009 An Efficient Computational Solution Scheme of the Random Eigenvalue Problems Rajib Chowdhury & Sondipon Adhikari School of Engineering Swansea University Swansea,
More information19 : Slice Sampling and HMC
10-708: Probabilistic Graphical Models 10-708, Spring 2018 19 : Slice Sampling and HMC Lecturer: Kayhan Batmanghelich Scribes: Boxiang Lyu 1 MCMC (Auxiliary Variables Methods) In inference, we are often
More informationBayesian System Identification based on Hierarchical Sparse Bayesian Learning and Gibbs Sampling with Application to Structural Damage Assessment
Bayesian System Identification based on Hierarchical Sparse Bayesian Learning and Gibbs Sampling with Application to Structural Damage Assessment Yong Huang a,b, James L. Beck b,* and Hui Li a a Key Lab
More informationHamiltonian Monte Carlo Without Detailed Balance
Jascha Sohl-Dickstein Stanford University, Palo Alto. Khan Academy, Mountain View Mayur Mudigonda Redwood Institute for Theoretical Neuroscience, University of California at Berkeley Michael R. DeWeese
More information17 : Optimization and Monte Carlo Methods
10-708: Probabilistic Graphical Models Spring 2017 17 : Optimization and Monte Carlo Methods Lecturer: Avinava Dubey Scribes: Neil Spencer, YJ Choe 1 Recap 1.1 Monte Carlo Monte Carlo methods such as rejection
More informationPattern Recognition and Machine Learning
Christopher M. Bishop Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning ÖSpri inger Contents Preface Mathematical notation Contents vii xi xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Example: Polynomial Curve Fitting 4 1.2 Probability
More informationRiemann Manifold Methods in Bayesian Statistics
Ricardo Ehlers ehlers@icmc.usp.br Applied Maths and Stats University of São Paulo, Brazil Working Group in Statistical Learning University College Dublin September 2015 Bayesian inference is based on Bayes
More information17 : Markov Chain Monte Carlo
10-708: Probabilistic Graphical Models, Spring 2015 17 : Markov Chain Monte Carlo Lecturer: Eric P. Xing Scribes: Heran Lin, Bin Deng, Yun Huang 1 Review of Monte Carlo Methods 1.1 Overview Monte Carlo
More information1 Geometry of high dimensional probability distributions
Hamiltonian Monte Carlo October 20, 2018 Debdeep Pati References: Neal, Radford M. MCMC using Hamiltonian dynamics. Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo 2.11 (2011): 2. Betancourt, Michael. A conceptual
More informationStochastic structural dynamic analysis with random damping parameters
Stochastic structural dynamic analysis with random damping parameters K. Sepahvand 1, F. Saati Khosroshahi, C. A. Geweth and S. Marburg Chair of Vibroacoustics of Vehicles and Machines Department of Mechanical
More informationApproximate inference in Energy-Based Models
CSC 2535: 2013 Lecture 3b Approximate inference in Energy-Based Models Geoffrey Hinton Two types of density model Stochastic generative model using directed acyclic graph (e.g. Bayes Net) Energy-based
More informationGaussian Process Approximations of Stochastic Differential Equations
Gaussian Process Approximations of Stochastic Differential Equations Cédric Archambeau Centre for Computational Statistics and Machine Learning University College London c.archambeau@cs.ucl.ac.uk CSML
More informationMonte Carlo in Bayesian Statistics
Monte Carlo in Bayesian Statistics Matthew Thomas SAMBa - University of Bath m.l.thomas@bath.ac.uk December 4, 2014 Matthew Thomas (SAMBa) Monte Carlo in Bayesian Statistics December 4, 2014 1 / 16 Overview
More informationBayesian Networks BY: MOHAMAD ALSABBAGH
Bayesian Networks BY: MOHAMAD ALSABBAGH Outlines Introduction Bayes Rule Bayesian Networks (BN) Representation Size of a Bayesian Network Inference via BN BN Learning Dynamic BN Introduction Conditional
More informationHuman Pose Tracking I: Basics. David Fleet University of Toronto
Human Pose Tracking I: Basics David Fleet University of Toronto CIFAR Summer School, 2009 Looking at People Challenges: Complex pose / motion People have many degrees of freedom, comprising an articulated
More informationDYNAMIC MODELING OF SPOT WELDS USING THIN LAYER INTERFACE THEORY
Hamid Ahmadian: 1 DYNAMIC MODELING OF SPOT WELDS USING THIN LAYER INTERFACE THEORY H. Ahmadian 1, H. Jalali 1, JE Mottershead 2, MI Friswell 3 1 Iran University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Mechanical
More informationOperational modal analysis using forced excitation and input-output autoregressive coefficients
Operational modal analysis using forced excitation and input-output autoregressive coefficients *Kyeong-Taek Park 1) and Marco Torbol 2) 1), 2) School of Urban and Environment Engineering, UNIST, Ulsan,
More informationModel selection, updating and prediction of fatigue. crack propagation using nested sampling algorithm
Model selection, updating and prediction of fatigue crack propagation using nested sampling algorithm A. BEN ABDESSALEM a a. Dynamics Research Group, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of
More informationParameter Selection and Covariance Updating
Parameter Selection and Covariance Updating Tiago AN Silva Nuno MM Maia Michael Lin 3 and John E Mottershead 45 Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa Lisbon Portugal LAETA IDMEC Instituto Superior
More informationResearch Article Damage Detection in Railway Truss Bridges Employing Data Sensitivity under Bayesian Framework: A Numerical Investigation
Hindawi Shock and Vibration Volume 7, Article ID 64339, 9 pages https://doi.org/.55/7/64339 Research Article Damage Detection in Railway Truss Bridges Employing Data Sensitivity under Bayesian Framework:
More informationOn the Optimal Scaling of the Modified Metropolis-Hastings algorithm
On the Optimal Scaling of the Modified Metropolis-Hastings algorithm K. M. Zuev & J. L. Beck Division of Engineering and Applied Science California Institute of Technology, MC 4-44, Pasadena, CA 925, USA
More informationSpectral methods for fuzzy structural dynamics: modal vs direct approach
Spectral methods for fuzzy structural dynamics: modal vs direct approach S Adhikari Zienkiewicz Centre for Computational Engineering, College of Engineering, Swansea University, Wales, UK IUTAM Symposium
More informationExample: Ground Motion Attenuation
Example: Ground Motion Attenuation Problem: Predict the probability distribution for Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA), the level of ground shaking caused by an earthquake Earthquake records are used to update
More informationMix & Match Hamiltonian Monte Carlo
Mix & Match Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Elena Akhmatskaya,2 and Tijana Radivojević BCAM - Basque Center for Applied Mathematics, Bilbao, Spain 2 IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain MCMSki
More informationHamiltonian Monte Carlo for Scalable Deep Learning
Hamiltonian Monte Carlo for Scalable Deep Learning Isaac Robson Department of Statistics and Operations Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill isrobson@email.unc.edu BIOS 740 May 4, 2018
More informationMachine Learning for Data Science (CS4786) Lecture 24
Machine Learning for Data Science (CS4786) Lecture 24 Graphical Models: Approximate Inference Course Webpage : http://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs4786/2016sp/ BELIEF PROPAGATION OR MESSAGE PASSING Each
More informationComparison between the basic least squares and the Bayesian approach for elastic constants identification
Comparison between the basic least squares and the ayesian approach for elastic constants identification C Gogu 1,,3, R Haftka, R Le Riche 1, J Molimard 1, Vautrin 1, Sankar 1 Ecole des Mines de Saint
More informationInterval model updating: method and application
Interval model updating: method and application H. Haddad Khodaparast, J.E. Mottershead, K.J. Badcock University of Liverpool, School of Engineering, Harrison-Hughes Building, The Quadrangle, L69 3GH,
More informationTutorial on Probabilistic Programming with PyMC3
185.A83 Machine Learning for Health Informatics 2017S, VU, 2.0 h, 3.0 ECTS Tutorial 02-04.04.2017 Tutorial on Probabilistic Programming with PyMC3 florian.endel@tuwien.ac.at http://hci-kdd.org/machine-learning-for-health-informatics-course
More informationSTA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning
STA 4273H: Statistical Machine Learning Russ Salakhutdinov Department of Computer Science! Department of Statistical Sciences! rsalakhu@cs.toronto.edu! h0p://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~rsalakhu/ Lecture 7 Approximate
More informationTransitional Markov Chain Monte Carlo: Observations and Improvements
Transitional Markov Chain Monte Carlo: Observations and Improvements Wolfgang Betz, Iason Papaioannou, Daniel Straub Engineering Risk Analysis Group, Technische Universität München, 8333 München, Germany
More informationStatistical Methods in Particle Physics Lecture 1: Bayesian methods
Statistical Methods in Particle Physics Lecture 1: Bayesian methods SUSSP65 St Andrews 16 29 August 2009 Glen Cowan Physics Department Royal Holloway, University of London g.cowan@rhul.ac.uk www.pp.rhul.ac.uk/~cowan
More informationMODEL REDUCTION USING GUYAN, IRS, AND DYNAMIC METHODS
MODEL REDUCTION USING GUYAN, IRS, AND DYNAMIC METHODS Christopher C. Flanigan Manager, Advanced Test and Analysis SDRC Operations, Inc. 11995 El Camino Real, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92130 USA ABSTRACT
More informationABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
ABSTRACT Presented in this paper is an approach to fault diagnosis based on a unifying review of linear Gaussian models. The unifying review draws together different algorithms such as PCA, factor analysis,
More informationAdvanced Statistical Methods. Lecture 6
Advanced Statistical Methods Lecture 6 Convergence distribution of M.-H. MCMC We denote the PDF estimated by the MCMC as. It has the property Convergence distribution After some time, the distribution
More informationDifferent Criteria for Active Learning in Neural Networks: A Comparative Study
Different Criteria for Active Learning in Neural Networks: A Comparative Study Jan Poland and Andreas Zell University of Tübingen, WSI - RA Sand 1, 72076 Tübingen, Germany Abstract. The field of active
More informationABSTRACT Modal parameters obtained from modal testing (such as modal vectors, natural frequencies, and damping ratios) have been used extensively in s
ABSTRACT Modal parameters obtained from modal testing (such as modal vectors, natural frequencies, and damping ratios) have been used extensively in system identification, finite element model updating,
More informationSystem Parameter Identification for Uncertain Two Degree of Freedom Vibration System
System Parameter Identification for Uncertain Two Degree of Freedom Vibration System Hojong Lee and Yong Suk Kang Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Tech 318 Randolph Hall, Blacksburg, VA,
More informationHow to Validate Stochastic Finite Element Models from Uncertain Experimental Modal Data Yves Govers
How to Validate Stochastic Finite Element Models from Uncertain Experimental Modal Data Yves Govers Slide 1 Outline/ Motivation Validation of Finite Element Models on basis of modal data (eigenfrequencies
More informationBayesian Inference for the Multivariate Normal
Bayesian Inference for the Multivariate Normal Will Penny Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, University College, London WC1N 3BG, UK. November 28, 2014 Abstract Bayesian inference for the multivariate
More informationMarkov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)
School of Computer Science 10-708 Probabilistic Graphical Models Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) Readings: MacKay Ch. 29 Jordan Ch. 21 Matt Gormley Lecture 16 March 14, 2016 1 Homework 2 Housekeeping Due
More informationFastGP: an R package for Gaussian processes
FastGP: an R package for Gaussian processes Giri Gopalan Harvard University Luke Bornn Harvard University Many methodologies involving a Gaussian process rely heavily on computationally expensive functions
More informationBrief introduction to Markov Chain Monte Carlo
Brief introduction to Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics seminar Stochastic modeling in economics and finance November 7, 2011 Brief introduction to Content 1 and motivation Classical
More informationHamiltonian Monte Carlo with Fewer Momentum Reversals
Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with ewer Momentum Reversals Jascha Sohl-Dickstein December 6, 2 Hamiltonian dynamics with partial momentum refreshment, in the style of Horowitz, Phys. ett. B, 99, explore the
More informationInfinite Mixtures of Gaussian Process Experts
in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 14, MIT Press (22). Infinite Mixtures of Gaussian Process Experts Carl Edward Rasmussen and Zoubin Ghahramani Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit
More informationA fuzzy finite element analysis technique for structural static analysis based on interval fields
A fuzzy finite element analysis technique for structural static analysis based on interval fields Wim Verhaeghe, Maarten De Munck, Wim Desmet, Dirk Vandepitte and David Moens Department of Mechanical Engineering,
More informationDamage Assessment of the Z24 bridge by FE Model Updating. Anne Teughels 1, Guido De Roeck
Damage Assessment of the Z24 bridge by FE Model Updating Anne Teughels, Guido De Roeck Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Department of Civil Engineering Kasteelpark Arenberg 4, B 3 Heverlee, Belgium Anne.Teughels@bwk.kuleuven.ac.be
More informationRecent Advances in Bayesian Inference Techniques
Recent Advances in Bayesian Inference Techniques Christopher M. Bishop Microsoft Research, Cambridge, U.K. research.microsoft.com/~cmbishop SIAM Conference on Data Mining, April 2004 Abstract Bayesian
More informationA Bayesian Approach to Phylogenetics
A Bayesian Approach to Phylogenetics Niklas Wahlberg Based largely on slides by Paul Lewis (www.eeb.uconn.edu) An Introduction to Bayesian Phylogenetics Bayesian inference in general Markov chain Monte
More informationIntroduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Method
Introduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Method Mingwei Tang Department of Statistics University of Washington mingwt@uw.edu November 14, 2017 1 Hamiltonian System Notation: q R d : position vector, p R
More informationPrediction of Data with help of the Gaussian Process Method
of Data with help of the Gaussian Process Method R. Preuss, U. von Toussaint Max-Planck-Institute for Plasma Physics EURATOM Association 878 Garching, Germany March, Abstract The simulation of plasma-wall
More informationDamage detection of truss bridge via vibration data using TPC technique
Damage detection of truss bridge via vibration data using TPC technique Ahmed Noor AL-QAYYIM 1,2, Barlas Özden ÇAĞLAYAN 1 1 Faculty of Civil Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
More informationstiffness to the system stiffness matrix. The nondimensional parameter i is introduced to allow the modeling of damage in the ith substructure. A subs
A BAYESIAN PROBABILISTIC DAMAGE DETECTION USING LOAD-DEPENDENT RIT VECTORS HOON SOHN Λ and KINCHO H. LAW y Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 9435-42,U.S.A.
More informationMarkov Chain Monte Carlo Methods for Stochastic Optimization
Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods for Stochastic Optimization John R. Birge The University of Chicago Booth School of Business Joint work with Nicholas Polson, Chicago Booth. JRBirge U of Toronto, MIE,
More informationEVALUATING SYMMETRIC INFORMATION GAP BETWEEN DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS USING PARTICLE FILTER
EVALUATING SYMMETRIC INFORMATION GAP BETWEEN DYNAMICAL SYSTEMS USING PARTICLE FILTER Zhen Zhen 1, Jun Young Lee 2, and Abdus Saboor 3 1 Mingde College, Guizhou University, China zhenz2000@21cn.com 2 Department
More informationIDENTIFICATION OF FRICTION ENERGY DISSIPATION USING FREE VIBRATION VELOCITY: MEASUREMENT AND MODELING
IDENTIFICATION OF FRICTION ENERGY DISSIPATION USING FREE VIBRATION VELOCITY: MEASUREMENT AND MODELING Christoph A. Kossack, Tony L. Schmitz, and John C. Ziegert Department of Mechanical Engineering and
More informationLearning Gaussian Process Models from Uncertain Data
Learning Gaussian Process Models from Uncertain Data Patrick Dallaire, Camille Besse, and Brahim Chaib-draa DAMAS Laboratory, Computer Science & Software Engineering Department, Laval University, Canada
More informationOn the Nature of Random System Matrices in Structural Dynamics
On the Nature of Random System Matrices in Structural Dynamics S. ADHIKARI AND R. S. LANGLEY Cambridge University Engineering Department Cambridge, U.K. Nature of Random System Matrices p.1/20 Outline
More informationMarkov chain Monte Carlo methods for visual tracking
Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for visual tracking Ray Luo rluo@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720
More informationA variational radial basis function approximation for diffusion processes
A variational radial basis function approximation for diffusion processes Michail D. Vrettas, Dan Cornford and Yuan Shen Aston University - Neural Computing Research Group Aston Triangle, Birmingham B4
More informationan introduction to bayesian inference
with an application to network analysis http://jakehofman.com january 13, 2010 motivation would like models that: provide predictive and explanatory power are complex enough to describe observed phenomena
More informationBOUNDARY CONDITION IDENTIFICATION BY SOLVING CHARACTERISTIC EQUATIONS
Journal of Sound and
More informationEvaluating the value of structural heath monitoring with longitudinal performance indicators and hazard functions using Bayesian dynamic predictions
Evaluating the value of structural heath monitoring with longitudinal performance indicators and hazard functions using Bayesian dynamic predictions C. Xing, R. Caspeele, L. Taerwe Ghent University, Department
More informationPrecision Engineering
Precision Engineering 38 (2014) 18 27 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Precision Engineering j o ur nal homep age : www.elsevier.com/locate/precision Tool life prediction using Bayesian updating.
More informationMarkov Chain Monte Carlo methods
Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods By Oleg Makhnin 1 Introduction a b c M = d e f g h i 0 f(x)dx 1.1 Motivation 1.1.1 Just here Supresses numbering 1.1.2 After this 1.2 Literature 2 Method 2.1 New math As
More informationVirtual distortions applied to structural modelling and sensitivity analysis. Damage identification testing example
AMAS Workshop on Smart Materials and Structures SMART 03 (pp.313 324) Jadwisin, September 2-5, 2003 Virtual distortions applied to structural modelling and sensitivity analysis. Damage identification testing
More informationMODIFIED METROPOLIS-HASTINGS ALGORITHM WITH DELAYED REJECTION FOR HIGH-DIMENSIONAL RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
SEECCM 2009 2nd South-East European Conference on Computational Mechanics An IACM-ECCOMAS Special Interest Conference M. Papadrakakis, M. Kojic, V. Papadopoulos (eds.) Rhodes, Greece, 22-24 June 2009 MODIFIED
More informationVariational Methods in Bayesian Deconvolution
PHYSTAT, SLAC, Stanford, California, September 8-, Variational Methods in Bayesian Deconvolution K. Zarb Adami Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, UK This paper gives an introduction to the
More informationMEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY AND SUMMARISING MONTE CARLO SAMPLES
XX IMEKO World Congress Metrology for Green Growth September 9 14, 212, Busan, Republic of Korea MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY AND SUMMARISING MONTE CARLO SAMPLES A B Forbes National Physical Laboratory, Teddington,
More informationNeutron inverse kinetics via Gaussian Processes
Neutron inverse kinetics via Gaussian Processes P. Picca Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy R. Furfaro University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona Outline Introduction Review of inverse kinetics techniques
More informationA Search and Jump Algorithm for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Sampling. Christopher Jennison. Adriana Ibrahim. Seminar at University of Kuwait
A Search and Jump Algorithm for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Sampling Christopher Jennison Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Bath, UK http://people.bath.ac.uk/mascj Adriana Ibrahim Institute
More information