MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392437661 · doi:10.1016/j.ymssp.2024.111279

Enhancing structural anomaly detection using a bounded autoregressive component

2024· article· en· W4392437661 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Zhanwen Xin, James A. Goulet

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Systems and Signal Processing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHydro-Québec
KeywordsAutoregressive modelComponent (thermodynamics)Bounded functionAnomaly detectionAnomaly (physics)Computer scienceNonlinear autoregressive exogenous modelEconometricsPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceBiological systemAlgorithmPhysicsBiologyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural Health Monitoring has the potential to enhance the safety and serviceability of our aging infrastructures by detecting anomalies at an early stage. Bayesian Dynamic Linear Models (BDLM) have been shown to be effective at detecting anomalies by extracting structural patterns and latent variables from complex and noisy time series. However, the autoregressive component modelling the stationary prediction errors in most BDLM has a tendency to wrongfully capture patterns that should be attributed to anomalies, and thus hinders their detectability. This paper proposes a new bounded autoregressive (BAR) component, which imposes constraints on the autoregressive latent process with a new mixture Rectified Linear activation Unit. The BAR component is probabilistically verified on synthetic data using a new F1t metric, and is validated using real observations collected on a bridge and on a dam located in Canada. The experimental results demonstrate that the BAR model surpasses the performance of the existing autoregressive component with (1) an improved accuracy at estimating hidden states, (2) an early detection of anomalies, (3) a capacity to detect smaller anomaly magnitudes, and (4) the ability to control the tradeoff between the anomaly detectability and the false alarm rate.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMechanical Systems and Signal ProcessingSame topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207