MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310732231 · doi:10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100147

Design and evaluation of hysteresis models for structural systems using a fuzzy adaptive charged system search

2022· article· en· W4310732231 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Mohajer Rahbari, Hedayat Veladi, Mahdi Azizi, Pooya Sareh, Siamak Talatahari

Bibliographic record

VenueDecision Analytics Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaheuristicFuzzy logicComputer scienceNonlinear systemHysteresisProcess (computing)Parametric statisticsRange (aeronautics)Mathematical optimizationParticle swarm optimizationIdentification (biology)Control theory (sociology)AlgorithmEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many hysteresis models have been proposed for the simulation of the nonlinear behavior of structures each of which has certain advantages depending on specific applications and desired objectives. The Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori model is one of the hysteresis models that has been utilized for a wide range of applications. However, the parameter tuning of this model has been conducted based on expert knowledge, which has not led to the development of a precise nonlinear model. The main contribution of this paper is to propose a metaheuristic-based parametric identification process for the design of the Bouc–Wen–Baber–Noori hysteresis model and evaluate the results by using some established experimental investigation methods. To fulfill this aim, the Fuzzy Adaptive Charged System Search (F-CSS) is proposed for optimization in which a fuzzy-logic-based parameter tuning process is utilized to achieve better performance in comparison with the standard Charged System Search algorithm (CSS). For nonlinear dynamic analysis, an Iterative Hysteretic Analysis (IHA) process is also introduced for conducting the precise analysis of the structure with exact solutions. Comparing the metaheuristic-based results to the experimental findings demonstrates that the proposed algorithm is capable of providing very competitive results. Besides, the proposed adaptive method is capable of producing very competitive results in comparison with different optimization algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.214
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDecision Analytics JournalSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207