Structures experience large vibrations and stress variations during their life cycles. This causes reduction in their load-carrying capacity which is the main design criteria for many structures. Therefore, it is important to accurately establish the performance of structures after construction that often needs full-field strain or stress measurements. Many traditional inspection methods collect strain measurements by using wired strain gauges. These strain gauges carry a high installation cost and have high power demand. In contrast, this paper introduces a new methodology to replace this high cost with utilizing inexpensive data coming from wireless sensor networks. The study proposes to collect acceleration responses coming from a structure and give them as an input to deep learning framework to estimate the stress or strain responses. The obtained stress or strain time series then can be used in many applications to better understand the conditions of the structures. In this paper, designed deep learning architecture consists of multi-layer neural networks and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM). The network achieves to learn the relationship between input and output by exploiting the temporal dependencies of them. In the evaluation of the method, a three-story steel building is simulated by using various dynamic wind and earthquake loading scenarios. The acceleration time histories under these loading cases are utilized to predict the stress time series. The learned architecture is tested on acceleration time series that the structure has never experienced.
more »
« less
Structural sensing with deep learning: Strain estimation from acceleration data for fatigue assessment
Many of the civil structures experience significant vibrations and repeated stress cycles during their life span. These conditions are the bases for fatigue analysis to accurately establish the remaining fatigue life of the structures that ideally requires a full‐field strain assessment of the structures over years of data collection. Traditional inspection methods collect strain measurements by using strain gauges for a short time span and extrapolate the measurements in time; nevertheless, large‐scale deployment of strain gauges is expensive and laborious as more spatial information is desired. This paper introduces a deep learning‐based approach to replace this high cost by employing inexpensive data coming from acceleration sensors. The proposed approach utilizes collected acceleration responses as inputs to a multistage deep neural network based on long short‐term memory and fully connected layers to estimate the strain responses. The memory requirement of training long acceleration sequences is reduced by proposing a novel training strategy. In the evaluation of the method, a laboratory‐scale horizontally curved girder subjected to various loading scenarios is tested.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10155268
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering
- Volume:
- 35
- Issue:
- 12
- ISSN:
- 1093-9687
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- p. 1349-1364
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9.more » « less
-
In this work, we develop a two time-scale deep learning approach for beamforming and phase shift (BF-PS) design in time-varying RIS-aided networks. In contrast to most existing works that assume perfect CSI for BF-PS design, we take into account the cost of channel estimation and utilize Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks to design BF-PS from limited samples of estimated channel CSI. An LSTM channel extrapolator is designed first to generate high resolution estimates of the cascaded BS-RIS-user channel from sampled signals acquired at a slow time scale. Subsequently, the outputs of the channel extrapolator are fed into an LSTM-based two stage neural network for the joint design of BF-PS at a fast time scale of per coherence time. To address the critical issue that training overhead increases linearly with the number of RIS elements, we consider various pilot structures and sampling patterns in time and space to evaluate the efficiency and sum-rate performance of the proposed two time-scale design. Our results show that the proposed two time-scale design can achieve good spectral efficiency when taking into account the pilot overhead required for training. The proposed design also outperforms a direct BF-PS design that does not employ a channel extrapolator. These demonstrate the feasibility of applying RIS in time-varying channels with reasonable pilot overhead.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Pavement structures are designed to withstand continuous damage during their design life. Damage starts as soon as the pavement is open to traffic and increases with time. If maintenance activities are not considered in the initial design or considered but not applied during the service life, damage will grow to a point where rehabilitation may be the only and most expensive option left. In order to monitor the evolution of damage and its severity in pavement structures, a novel data compression approach based on cumulative measurements from a piezoelectric sensor is presented in this paper. Specifically, the piezoelectric sensor uses a thin film of polyvinylidene fluoride to sense the energy produced by the micro deformation generated due to the application of traffic loads. Epoxy solution has been used to encapsulate the membrane providing hardness and flexibility to withstand the high-loads and the high-temperatures during construction of the asphalt layer. The piezoelectric sensors have been exposed to three months of loading (approximately 1.0 million loads of 65 kN) at the French Institute of Science and Technology for Transport, Development and Networks (IFSTTAR) fatigue carrousel. Notably, the sensors survived the construction and testing. Reference measurements were made with a commercial conventional strain gauge specifically designed for measurements in hot mix asphalt layers. Results from the carrousel successfully demonstrate that the novel approach can be considered as a good indicator of damage progression, thus alleviating the need to measure strains in pavement for the purpose of damage tracking.more » « less
-
High cycle fatigue is a major cause of cracking in steel structures subjected to cyclic loading. It can result in substantial financial losses and structural failures compromising the safety of users. Uniaxial methods are in many cases insufficient for large in-service structures with complex geometry and connections subjected to multiaxial non-proportional loadings. A new method for fatigue life prediction for complex structures is presented using the critical plane method and the Kalman filter. The applicability of the methodology proposed is demonstrated and evaluated in a roller coaster support structure. Strain rosettes and accelerometers were installed on a support bracket near weld lines to measure responses. A substructure model is defined and used to estimate response prediction in the weld of the support bracket. The estimation of the input and the state estimation is performed using the augmented Kalman filter method, based on the response measurements and the substructured model. This new methodology is anticipated to be used for real-time fatigue prognosis of highway bridges.more » « less
