skip to main content

Title: Efficient Distortion Prediction of Additively Manufactured Parts Using Bayesian Model Transfer Between Material Systems
Abstract Distortion in laser-based additive manufacturing (LBAM) is a critical issue that adversely affects the geometric integrity of additively manufactured parts and generally exhibits a complicated dependence on the underlying material. The differences in properties between distinct materials prevent the immediate application of a distortion model learned for one material to another, which introduces the challenge in LBAM of learning a distortion model for a new material system given past experiments. Current methods for investigating the distortion of different material systems typically involve finite element analysis or a large number of experiments in an empirical study. However, these methods do not learn from previous experiments and can incur significant costs in terms of computation, time, or resources. We propose a Bayesian model transfer methodology that is both physics-based and data-driven to leverage past experiments on previously studied material systems for more efficient distortion modeling of new systems. This method transfers distortion models across distinct materials based on the statistical effect equivalence framework by formulating the differences between two materials as a lurking variable. Our method reduces the experimentation and effort needed for specifying distortion models for new material systems. We validate our methodology in a case study of distortion model more » transfer from Ti–6Al–4V disks to 316L stainless steel disks. This case study is the first instance of model transfer between material systems and illustrates the ability of the Bayesian model transfer methodology to address the issue of comprehensive distortion modeling across varying material systems in LBAM. « less
Authors:
; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1635966
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10173698
Journal Name:
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Volume:
142
Issue:
5
ISSN:
1087-1357
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. 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 EEGmore »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.« less
  2. Building Information Modelling (BIM) is an integrated informational process and plays a key role in enabling efficient planning and control of a project in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) domain. Industry Foundation Classes (IFC)-based BIM allows building information to be interoperable among different BIM applications. Different stakeholders take different responsibilities in a project and therefore keep different types of information to meet project requirements. In this paper, the authors proposed and adopted a six-step methodology to support BIM interoperability between architectural design and structural analysis at both AEC project level and information level, in which: (1) the intrinsic and extrinsic information transferred between architectural models and structural models were analyzed and demonstrated by a Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) model that the authors developed; (2) the proposed technical routes with different combinations, and their applications to different project delivery methods provided new instruments to stakeholders in industry for efficient and accurate decision-making; (3) the material centered invariant signature with portability can improve information exchange between different data formats and models to support interoperable BIM applications; and (4) a developed formal material information representation and checking method was tested on a case study where its efficiency was demonstrated tomore »outperform: (1) proprietary representations and information checking method based on a manual operation, and (2) MVD-based information checking method. The proposed invariant signatures-based material information representation and checking method brings a better efficiency for information transfer between architectural design and structural analysis, which can have significant positive effect on a project delivery, due to the frequent and iterative update of a project design. This improves the information transfer and coordination between architects and structural engineers and therefore the efficiency of the whole project. The proposed method can be extended and applied to other application phases and functions such as cost estimation, scheduling, and energy analysis.« less
  3. null (Ed.)
    Large, comprehensive collections of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) datasets have been generated that allow for the full transcriptional characterization of cell types across a wide variety of biological and clinical conditions. As new methods arise to measure distinct cellular modalities, a key analytical challenge is to integrate these datasets or transfer knowledge from one to the other to better understand cellular identity and functions. Here, we present a simple yet surprisingly effective method named common factor integration and transfer learning (cFIT) for capturing various batch effects across experiments, technologies, subjects, and even species. The proposed method models the shared information between various datasets by a common factor space while allowing for unique distortions and shifts in genewise expression in each batch. The model parameters are learned under an iterative nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) framework and then used for synchronized integration from across-domain assays. In addition, the model enables transferring via low-rank matrix from more informative data to allow for precise identification in data of lower quality. Compared with existing approaches, our method imposes weaker assumptions on the cell composition of each individual dataset; however, it is shown to be more reliable in preserving biological variations. We apply cFIT to multiplemore »scRNA-seq datasets of developing brain from human and mouse, varying by technologies and developmental stages. The successful integration and transfer uncover the transcriptional resemblance across systems. The study helps establish a comprehensive landscape of brain cell-type diversity and provides insights into brain development.« less
  4. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop, apply and validate a mesh-free graph theory–based approach for rapid thermal modeling of the directed energy deposition (DED) additive manufacturing (AM) process. Design/methodology/approach In this study, the authors develop a novel mesh-free graph theory–based approach to predict the thermal history of the DED process. Subsequently, the authors validated the graph theory predicted temperature trends using experimental temperature data for DED of titanium alloy parts (Ti-6Al-4V). Temperature trends were tracked by embedding thermocouples in the substrate. The DED process was simulated using the graph theory approach, and the thermal history predictions were validated based on the data from the thermocouples. Findings The temperature trends predicted by the graph theory approach have mean absolute percentage error of approximately 11% and root mean square error of 23°C when compared to the experimental data. Moreover, the graph theory simulation was obtained within 4 min using desktop computing resources, which is less than the build time of 25 min. By comparison, a finite element–based model required 136 min to converge to similar level of error. Research limitations/implications This study uses data from fixed thermocouples when printing thin-wall DED parts. In the future, the authors will incorporate infrared thermal cameramore »data from large parts. Practical implications The DED process is particularly valuable for near-net shape manufacturing, repair and remanufacturing applications. However, DED parts are often afflicted with flaws, such as cracking and distortion. In DED, flaw formation is largely governed by the intensity and spatial distribution of heat in the part during the process, often referred to as the thermal history. Accordingly, fast and accurate thermal models to predict the thermal history are necessary to understand and preclude flaw formation. Originality/value This paper presents a new mesh-free computational thermal modeling approach based on graph theory (network science) and applies it to DED. The approach eschews the tedious and computationally demanding meshing aspect of finite element modeling and allows rapid simulation of the thermal history in additive manufacturing. Although the graph theory has been applied to thermal modeling of laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), there are distinct phenomenological differences between DED and LPBF that necessitate substantial modifications to the graph theory approach.« less
  5. Shou, Wenying (Ed.)
    To increase our basic understanding of the ecology and evolution of conjugative plasmids, we need reliable estimates of their rate of transfer between bacterial cells. Current assays to measure transfer rate are based on deterministic modeling frameworks. However, some cell numbers in these assays can be very small, making estimates that rely on these numbers prone to noise. Here, we take a different approach to estimate plasmid transfer rate, which explicitly embraces this noise. Inspired by the classic fluctuation analysis of Luria and Delbrück, our method is grounded in a stochastic modeling framework. In addition to capturing the random nature of plasmid conjugation, our new methodology, the Luria–Delbrück method (“LDM”), can be used on a diverse set of bacterial systems, including cases for which current approaches are inaccurate. A notable example involves plasmid transfer between different strains or species where the rate that one type of cell donates the plasmid is not equal to the rate at which the other cell type donates. Asymmetry in these rates has the potential to bias or constrain current transfer estimates, thereby limiting our capabilities for estimating transfer in microbial communities. In contrast, the LDM overcomes obstacles of traditional methods by avoiding restrictive assumptionsmore »about growth and transfer rates for each population within the assay. Using stochastic simulations and experiments, we show that the LDM has high accuracy and precision for estimation of transfer rates compared to the most widely used methods, which can produce estimates that differ from the LDM estimate by orders of magnitude.« less