In this work, we present a new approach for latent system dynamics and remaining useful life (RUL) estimation of complex degrading systems using generative modeling and reinforcement learning. The main contributions of the proposed method are two-fold. First, we show how a deep generative model can approximate the functionality of high-fidelity simulators and, thus, is able to substitute expensive and complex physics-based models with data-driven surrogate ones. In other words, we can use the generative model in lieu of the actual system as a surrogate model of the system. Furthermore, we show how to use such surrogate models for predictive analytics. Our method follows two main steps. First, we use a deep variational autoencoder (VAE) to learn the distribution over the latent state-space that characterizes the dynamics of the system under monitoring. After model training, the probabilistic VAE decoder becomes the surrogate system model. Then, we develop a scalable reinforcement learning framework using the decoder as the environment, to train an agent for identifying adequate approximate values of the latent dynamics, as well as the RUL.To our knowledge, the method presented in this paper is the first in industrial prognostics that utilizes generative models and reinforcement learning in that capacity. While the process requires extensive data preprocessing and environment tailored design, which is not always possible, it demonstrates the ability of generative models working in conjunction with reinforcement learning to provide proper value estimations for system dynamics and their RUL. To validate the quality of the proposed method, we conducted numerical experiments using the train_FD002 dataset provided by the NASA CMAPSS data repository. Different subsets were used to train the VAE and the RL agent, and a leftover set was then used for model validation. The results shown prove the merit of our method and will further assist us in developing a data-driven RL environment that incorporates more complex latent dynamic layers, such as normal/faulty operating conditions and hazard processes.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on July 1, 2024
Design of experiments for the calibration of history-dependent models via deep reinforcement learning and an enhanced Kalman filter
Experimental data are often costly to obtain, which makes it difficult to calibrate complex models. For many models an experimental design that produces the best calibration given a limited experimental budget is not obvious. This paper introduces a deep reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm for design of experiments that maximizes the information gain measured by Kullback–Leibler divergence obtained via the Kalman filter (KF). This combination enables experimental design for rapid online experiments where manual trial-and-error is not feasible in the high-dimensional parametric design space. We formulate possible configurations of experiments as a decision tree and a Markov decision process, where a finite choice of actions is available at each incremental step. Once an action is taken, a variety of measurements are used to update the state of the experiment. This new data leads to a Bayesian update of the parameters by the KF, which is used to enhance the state representation. In contrast to the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency index, which requires additional sampling to test hypotheses for forward predictions, the KF can lower the cost of experiments by directly estimating the values of new data acquired through additional actions. In this work our applications focus on mechanical testing of materials. Numerical experiments with complex, history-dependent models are used to verify the implementation and benchmark the performance of the RL-designed experiments.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1846875
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10487109
- Publisher / Repository:
- Computational Mechanics
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Computational Mechanics
- Volume:
- 72
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 0178-7675
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 95 to 124
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- ["Experimental design","Deep reinforcement learning","Enhanced Kalman filter · Elastoplasticity"]
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The adaptive bitrate selection (ABR) mechanism, which decides the bitrate for each video chunk is an important part of video streaming. There has been significant interest in developing Reinforcement-Learning (RL) based ABR algorithms because of their ability to learn efficient bitrate actions based on past data and their demonstrated improvements over wired, 3G and 4G networks. However, the Quality of Experience (QoE), especially video stall time, of state-of-the-art ABR algorithms including the RL-based approaches falls short of expectations over commercial mmWave 5G networks, due to widely and wildly fluctuating throughput. These algorithms find optimal policies for a multi-objective unconstrained problem where the policies inherently depend on the predefined weight parameters of the multiple objectives (e.g., bitrate maximization, stall-time minimization). Our empirical evaluation suggests that such a policy cannot adequately adapt to the high variations of 5G throughput, resulting in long stall times. To address these issues, we formulate the ABR selection problem as a constrained Markov Decision Process where the objective is to maximize the QoE subject to a stall-time constraint. The strength of this formulation is that it helps mitigate the stall time while maintaining high bitrates. We propose COREL, a primal-dual actor-critic RL algorithm, which incorporates an additional critic network to estimate stall time compared to existing RL-based approaches and can tune the optimal dual variable or weight to guide the policy towards minimizing stall time. Our experiment results across various commercial mmWave 5G traces reveal that COREL reduces the average stall time by a factor of 4 and the 95th percentile by a factor of 2.more » « less
-
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
-
We propose a framework for verifiable and compositional reinforcement learning (RL) in which a collection of RL subsystems, each of which learns to accomplish a separate subtask, are composed to achieve an overall task. The framework consists of a high-level model, represented as a parametric Markov decision process (pMDP) which is used to plan and to analyze compositions of subsystems, and of the collection of low-level subsystems themselves. By defining interfaces between the subsystems, the framework enables automatic decompositions of task specifications, e.g., reach a target set of states with a probability of at least 0.95, into individual subtask specifications, i.e. achieve the subsystem's exit conditions with at least some minimum probability, given that its entry conditions are met. This in turn allows for the independent training and testing of the subsystems; if they each learn a policy satisfying the appropriate subtask specification, then their composition is guaranteed to satisfy the overall task specification. Conversely, if the subtask specifications cannot all be satisfied by the learned policies, we present a method, formulated as the problem of finding an optimal set of parameters in the pMDP, to automatically update the subtask specifications to account for the observed shortcomings. The result is an iterative procedure for defining subtask specifications, and for training the subsystems to meet them. As an additional benefit, this procedure allows for particularly challenging or important components of an overall task to be identified automatically, and focused on, during training. Experimental results demonstrate the presented framework's novel capabilities in both discrete and continuous RL settings. A collection of RL subsystems are trained, using proximal policy optimization algorithms, to navigate different portions of a labyrinth environment. A cross-labyrinth task specification is then decomposed into subtask specifications. Challenging portions of the labyrinth are automatically avoided if their corresponding subsystems cannot learn satisfactory policies within allowed training budgets. Unnecessary subsystems are not trained at all. The result is a compositional RL system that efficiently learns to satisfy task specifications.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)In anagram games, players are provided with letters for forming as many words as possible over a specified time duration. Anagram games have been used in controlled experiments to study problems such as collective identity, effects of goal setting, internal-external attributions, test anxiety, and others. The majority of work on anagram games involves individual players. Recently, work has expanded to group anagram games where players cooperate by sharing letters. In this work, we analyze experimental data from online social networked experiments of group anagram games. We develop mechanistic and data driven models of human decision-making to predict detailed game player actions (e.g., what word to form next). With these results, we develop a composite agent-based modeling and simulation platform that incorporates the models from data analysis. We compare model predictions against experimental data, which enables us to provide explanations of human decision-making and behavior. Finally, we provide illustrative case studies using agent-based simulations to demonstrate the efficacy of models to provide insights that are beyond those from experiments alone.more » « less
