Nonlinear System Identification Technique for a Base-Excited Structure Based on Modal Space Formulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of the nonlinear system identification techniques described in the existing literature required force and response information at all excitation degrees-of-freedom (DOFs). For cases, where the excitation comes from base motion, those methods cannot be applied as it is not feasible to obtain the measurements of motion at all DOFs from an experiment. The objective of this research is to develop the methodology for the nonlinear system identification of continuous, multimode, and lightly damped systems, where the excitation comes from the moving base. For this purpose, the closed-form expression for the equivalent force also known as the pseudo force from the measured data for the base-excited structure is developed. A hybrid model space is developed to find out the nonlinear restoring force at the nonlinear DOFs. Once the nonlinear restoring force is obtained, the nonlinear parameters are extracted using “multilinear least square regression” in a modal space. A modal space is chosen to express the direct and cross-coupling nonlinearities. Using a cantilever beam as an example, the proposed methodology is demonstrated, where the experimental setup, testing procedure, data acquisition, and data processing are presented. The example shows that the method proposed here is systematic and constructive for nonlinear parameter identification for base-excited structure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".